SAGINAW BAY PIPELINE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES: SAGINAW WINS THE PIPELINE DEPRECIATION BATTLE, BUT IS THE WAR OVER?
Saginaw Bay Pipeline Company (Saginaw Bay), an entity formed under a subsidiary of the Michigan Consolidated Gas Corp, operated a 126-mile underground, steel pipeline network constructed to transport "raw" or "wet" natural gas. As such, the company depreciated the asset over seve...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Energy law journal 2006-01, Vol.27 (1), p.217 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 217 |
container_title | Energy law journal |
container_volume | 27 |
creator | Hennessee, Sean |
description | Saginaw Bay Pipeline Company (Saginaw Bay), an entity formed under a subsidiary of the Michigan Consolidated Gas Corp, operated a 126-mile underground, steel pipeline network constructed to transport "raw" or "wet" natural gas. As such, the company depreciated the asset over seven years under the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS). The IRS challenged Saginaw Bay's use of this seven-year recovery period, maintaining a fifteen-year depreciation schedule was appropriate. In doing so, it disallowed $3,474,244 worth of depreciation deductions taken by the company. The overt issue for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals was whether Saginaw Bay's subterranean natural gas pipeline system should be depreciated over a seven-year period as opposed to a fifteen-year period. In conclusion, by striking down the IRS's argument, the Sixth Circuit further strengthened the foothold of the taxpayers in the continuing war over the appropriate depreciation period for gathering pipelines. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_213091221</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1033286301</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_2130912213</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjM0KgkAURmdRkP28w6V1xqiQ2CZGvdWAjaLXxJW0sIVElmbPn1DRttVZfOd8A6Zx0-a6Y6ysERu3bcW5wS2ba6xJxE4qkYErcohkhIFUCF54iITK4bmEVElCHxIShMkavnomVQK0x1_jYxSjJwXJUPVvRAEuwE0J5FvMRAzhEePNlA3Pp0tbzj6csPkWydvrt6a-d2X7KKq6a679VJiGxR3D7PGX9AKrbz66</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>213091221</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>SAGINAW BAY PIPELINE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES: SAGINAW WINS THE PIPELINE DEPRECIATION BATTLE, BUT IS THE WAR OVER?</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Hennessee, Sean</creator><creatorcontrib>Hennessee, Sean</creatorcontrib><description>Saginaw Bay Pipeline Company (Saginaw Bay), an entity formed under a subsidiary of the Michigan Consolidated Gas Corp, operated a 126-mile underground, steel pipeline network constructed to transport "raw" or "wet" natural gas. As such, the company depreciated the asset over seven years under the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS). The IRS challenged Saginaw Bay's use of this seven-year recovery period, maintaining a fifteen-year depreciation schedule was appropriate. In doing so, it disallowed $3,474,244 worth of depreciation deductions taken by the company. The overt issue for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals was whether Saginaw Bay's subterranean natural gas pipeline system should be depreciated over a seven-year period as opposed to a fifteen-year period. In conclusion, by striking down the IRS's argument, the Sixth Circuit further strengthened the foothold of the taxpayers in the continuing war over the appropriate depreciation period for gathering pipelines.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0270-9163</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Foundation of the Energy Law Journal</publisher><subject>Accelerated cost recovery system ; Depreciation ; Federal court decisions ; Litigation ; Natural gas ; Natural gas utilities ; Pipelines ; State court decisions ; Trials</subject><ispartof>Energy law journal, 2006-01, Vol.27 (1), p.217</ispartof><rights>Copyright Foundation of the Energy Law Journal 2006</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hennessee, Sean</creatorcontrib><title>SAGINAW BAY PIPELINE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES: SAGINAW WINS THE PIPELINE DEPRECIATION BATTLE, BUT IS THE WAR OVER?</title><title>Energy law journal</title><description>Saginaw Bay Pipeline Company (Saginaw Bay), an entity formed under a subsidiary of the Michigan Consolidated Gas Corp, operated a 126-mile underground, steel pipeline network constructed to transport "raw" or "wet" natural gas. As such, the company depreciated the asset over seven years under the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS). The IRS challenged Saginaw Bay's use of this seven-year recovery period, maintaining a fifteen-year depreciation schedule was appropriate. In doing so, it disallowed $3,474,244 worth of depreciation deductions taken by the company. The overt issue for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals was whether Saginaw Bay's subterranean natural gas pipeline system should be depreciated over a seven-year period as opposed to a fifteen-year period. In conclusion, by striking down the IRS's argument, the Sixth Circuit further strengthened the foothold of the taxpayers in the continuing war over the appropriate depreciation period for gathering pipelines.</description><subject>Accelerated cost recovery system</subject><subject>Depreciation</subject><subject>Federal court decisions</subject><subject>Litigation</subject><subject>Natural gas</subject><subject>Natural gas utilities</subject><subject>Pipelines</subject><subject>State court decisions</subject><subject>Trials</subject><issn>0270-9163</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNjM0KgkAURmdRkP28w6V1xqiQ2CZGvdWAjaLXxJW0sIVElmbPn1DRttVZfOd8A6Zx0-a6Y6ysERu3bcW5wS2ba6xJxE4qkYErcohkhIFUCF54iITK4bmEVElCHxIShMkavnomVQK0x1_jYxSjJwXJUPVvRAEuwE0J5FvMRAzhEePNlA3Pp0tbzj6csPkWydvrt6a-d2X7KKq6a679VJiGxR3D7PGX9AKrbz66</recordid><startdate>20060101</startdate><enddate>20060101</enddate><creator>Hennessee, Sean</creator><general>Foundation of the Energy Law Journal</general><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060101</creationdate><title>SAGINAW BAY PIPELINE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES: SAGINAW WINS THE PIPELINE DEPRECIATION BATTLE, BUT IS THE WAR OVER?</title><author>Hennessee, Sean</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_2130912213</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Accelerated cost recovery system</topic><topic>Depreciation</topic><topic>Federal court decisions</topic><topic>Litigation</topic><topic>Natural gas</topic><topic>Natural gas utilities</topic><topic>Pipelines</topic><topic>State court decisions</topic><topic>Trials</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hennessee, Sean</creatorcontrib><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Access via ABI/INFORM (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Energy law journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hennessee, Sean</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>SAGINAW BAY PIPELINE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES: SAGINAW WINS THE PIPELINE DEPRECIATION BATTLE, BUT IS THE WAR OVER?</atitle><jtitle>Energy law journal</jtitle><date>2006-01-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>217</spage><pages>217-</pages><issn>0270-9163</issn><abstract>Saginaw Bay Pipeline Company (Saginaw Bay), an entity formed under a subsidiary of the Michigan Consolidated Gas Corp, operated a 126-mile underground, steel pipeline network constructed to transport "raw" or "wet" natural gas. As such, the company depreciated the asset over seven years under the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS). The IRS challenged Saginaw Bay's use of this seven-year recovery period, maintaining a fifteen-year depreciation schedule was appropriate. In doing so, it disallowed $3,474,244 worth of depreciation deductions taken by the company. The overt issue for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals was whether Saginaw Bay's subterranean natural gas pipeline system should be depreciated over a seven-year period as opposed to a fifteen-year period. In conclusion, by striking down the IRS's argument, the Sixth Circuit further strengthened the foothold of the taxpayers in the continuing war over the appropriate depreciation period for gathering pipelines.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Foundation of the Energy Law Journal</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0270-9163 |
ispartof | Energy law journal, 2006-01, Vol.27 (1), p.217 |
issn | 0270-9163 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_213091221 |
source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Accelerated cost recovery system Depreciation Federal court decisions Litigation Natural gas Natural gas utilities Pipelines State court decisions Trials |
title | SAGINAW BAY PIPELINE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES: SAGINAW WINS THE PIPELINE DEPRECIATION BATTLE, BUT IS THE WAR OVER? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T16%3A28%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=SAGINAW%20BAY%20PIPELINE%20COMPANY%20v.%20UNITED%20STATES:%20SAGINAW%20WINS%20THE%20PIPELINE%20DEPRECIATION%20BATTLE,%20BUT%20IS%20THE%20WAR%20OVER?&rft.jtitle=Energy%20law%20journal&rft.au=Hennessee,%20Sean&rft.date=2006-01-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=217&rft.pages=217-&rft.issn=0270-9163&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E1033286301%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=213091221&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |