293 U.S. Opinion of the Court. HELVERING, COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 51. Argued November 7, 1934.-Decided December 3, 1934. 1. A corporation which sold an issue of bonds at a discount and paid commissions for marketing them, and which keeps its accounts and makes its returns on the accrual basis, may amortize the commissions as well as the discount over the life of the bonds; and the amount so allocated to each year may be deducted from gross income as a loss or expense of that year. P. 284. 2. So held where the commissions had been paid or allowed before the year 1913. Old Colony R. Co. v. Commissioner, 284 U. S. 552, distinguished. P. 287. 69 F. (2d) 67, affirmed. CERTIORARI* to review the reversal of a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, 26 B. T. A. 1126, upholding in part a deficiency assessment made by the Commissioner. Mr. H. Brian Holland, with whom Solicitor General Biggs, Assistant Attorney General Wideman, and Messrs. J. Louis Monarch and Morton K. Rothschild were on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Henry W. Clark for respondent. MR. JUSTICE STONE delivered the opinion of the Court. Prior to 1913 respondent, directly or through a subsidiary corporation, sold three issues of bonds, all maturing at dates subsequent to 1923. All were sold at a discount and petitioner paid or allowed to bankers an additional amount as commissions for marketing the bonds. The commissions and discounts, amortized over the periods *See Table of Cases Reported in this volume. 282 Opinion of the Court. from the dates of issue to maturity of the bonds, exceeded $300,000 in each of its taxable years 1918 to 1923 inclusive. Respondent kept its books and made its tax returns on the accrual basis. Deduction from gross income, in its tax returns, of the amortized amount of the commissions and discount was disallowed by the Commissioner, who found a corresponding deficiency under the applicable Revenue Acts of 1918, c. 18, 40 Stat. 1057, and 1921, c. 136, 42 Stat. 227. The Board of Tax Appeals ruled that the petitioner was entitled to the deduction for the discount but not commissions. 26 B. T. A. 1126. On the appeal of the taxpayer alone the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the Board, holding that the commissions should be treated in the same manner as the discount and that the deductions were rightly made. 69 F. (2d) 67. This Court granted certiorari on the petition of the Commissioner, which set up that the decision below conflicted with that of the Court of Appeals in the Seventh Circuit, in Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Commissioner, 47 F. (2d) 990, see also Bonded Mortgage Co. v. Commissioner, 70 F. (2d) 341, and is inconsistent with the decision of this Court in Old Colony R. Co. v. Commissioner, 284 U. S. 552, which held that premiums received by the taxpayer upon the sale of its bonds before 1913 could not be subjected to income tax in later years by the expedient of prorating them over the period between the date of issue of the bonds and their maturity. In support of the petition the Government contends that the commissions are not, as the court below held, losses incurred in the taxable year which are deductible under 234 (a) (4) of the Revenue Acts of 1918 and 1921, although not to be realized until payment of the bonds at maturity. It insists instead that the commissions are expenses incurred and paid at the date of the Opinion of the Court. 293 U.S. bond issue which cannot, on any theory, be deducted in later years. Further, it contends that the amortization of the commissions paid before 1913 and their deduction as amortized in tax returns in later years is inconsistent with the decision of this Court in Old Colony R. Co. v. Commissioner, supra. 1. There is no provision in either the 1918 or 1921 Revenue Acts specifically authorizing the deduction from gross income of commissions or discount paid or allowed by the taxpayer upon an issue of bonds. Section 234 of the 1918 and 1921 Acts, like the corresponding provisions of the Acts before and since, allow deduction of expenses paid or incurred, interest paid or accrued, and losses sustained during the taxable year. Sections 212 (b) and 213 (a) of the 1918 and 1921 Acts, like § 13 (d) of the 1916 Act, c. 463, 39 Stat. 756, 771, authorize the taxpayer to make his income tax returns on the accrual basis where his books are kept on that basis and reflect true income; they require it if he fails or is unable to make his return on a cash receipts and disbursements basis. The taxpayer is thus enabled to charge against income of the taxable period expenses incurred in and properly attributable to the process of earning income during that period, although payable in a later one. See United States v. Anderson, 269 U. S. 422, 440; Aluminum Castings Co. v. Routzhan, 282 U. S. 92; Niles Bement Pond Co. v. United States, 281 U. S. 357. It follows that when the return is made on the accrual basis, expenses or obligations incurred by the taxpayer in connection with a bond issue, which are not discharged until the payment of the bonds at maturity, may properly be accrued or amortized over the period of the life of the bonds and allowed as annual deductions from gross income. By Article 150, Treasury Regulations 33, as revised, relating to the 1916 Revenue Act, both commissions and discount upon bond issues of the taxpayer were classified 282 Opinion of the Court. as losses sustained on payment of the bonds at maturity, and taxpayers were permitted to amortize them over the life of the bonds and deduct them as amortized from gross income in each year. These regulations were continued under the 1918 and 1921 Acts, but the reference to commissions was omitted.1 Art. 544 of T. R. 45; Art. 545 of T. R. 62. The Board of Tax Appeals has consistently applied the regulations as to bond discount allowed before 1913 and in each case, as in the present, the Government, by failing to seek review of the ruling, has acquiesced in it.2 1 Notwithstanding this change in the regulations, the Commissioner appears to have continued to permit taxpayers to amortize and deduct commissions paid on bond issues prior to 1913, as the regulations under the 1916 Act had expressly permitted. A change of practice was sanctioned in Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Commissioner, 13 B. T. A. 988, 1034, affirmed by the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit, 47 F. (2d) 990, 991, where the taxpayer, while allowed to deduct bond discount, was not allowed to deduct from gross income the amortized expenses of a bond issue incurred before 1913. This refusal to allow amortization of commissions was confined to the case of bonds issued before 1913. Treasury regulations have also been silent as to commissions on bonds issued after that date. Art. 544 of T. R. 45; Art. 545 of T. R. 62, 65, 69; Art 68 of T. R. 75, 77. But there are a number of Treasury rulings which permit the amortization of commissions on bonds issued after 1913. O. D. 936, 4 Cum. Bul. 276; O. D. 959, 4 Cum. Bul. 129; I. T. 1412, I-2 Cum. Bul. 91; I. T. 1962, III-1 Cum. Bul. 291; S. M. 3691, IV-1 Cum. Bul. 145. 2 Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Co. v. Commissioner, 13 B. T. A. 988, 1027-1034; Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Commissioner, 16 B. T. A. 665, 686; Terminal Railroad Assn. of St. Louis v. Commissioner, 17 B. T. A. 1135, 1169; Chicago & Northwestern Ry. Co. v. Commissioner, 22 B. T. A. 1407, 1435. In one case the Board refused to allow the amortization, on the theory that the bonds were issued not by the taxpayer but by a predecessor corporation. Western Maryland Ry. Co. v. Commissioner, 12 B. T. A. 889, 907. On appeal by the taxpayer the Board was reversed. 33 F. (2d) 695, 697 (C. C. A. 4th). The Government did not seek review. Opinion of the Court. 293 U.S. Both commissions and discount, as the Government concedes, are factors in arriving at the actual amount of interest paid for the use of capital procured by a bond issue. The difference between the capital realized by the issue and par value, which is to be paid at maturity, must be added to the aggregate coupon payments in order to arrive at the total interest paid. Both discount and commissions are included in this difference. If the difference be viewed as a loss resulting from the funding operation, it is one which is realized only upon the payment of the bonds at maturity. But even if the commissions, unlike discount, may, as the Government insists, be regarded as a contemporary expense of procuring capital, it is one properly chargeable to capital account. In practice it is taken out of the proceeds of the bonds by the banker. But in any case it must be deducted from the selling price to arrive at the capital realized by the taxpayer from the sale of the bonds, in return for which he must, at maturity, pay the face value of the bonds. The effect of the transaction in reducing the capital realized, whether through the payment of commissions or the allowance of discount, is the same. In this respect the commissions do not differ from brokerage commissions paid upon the purchase or sale of property. The regulations have consistently treated such commissions, not as items of current expense, but as additions to the cost of the property or deductions from the proceeds of sale, in arriving at net capital profit or loss for purposes of computing the tax. 3 Art. 8 of T. R. 33, revised; Art. 293 of T. R. 45, 62; Art. 292 of T. R. 65, 69; Art. 282 of T. R. 74, 77; Hutton v. Commissioner, 12 B. T. A. 265, 266. Commissions paid to a banker for selling the taxpayer's corporate stock have not been allowed to be deducted as a current business expense, but have been treated as a capital expenditure. Simmons Co. v. Commissioner, 33 F. (2d) 75, 76 (C. C. A. 1st); Appeal of Charles H. Lilly Co., 2 B. T. A. 1058; Appeal of Emerson Electric Manufacturing Co., 3 B. T, A. 932, 935; Harrisburg |