[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 26, Volume 6]
[Revised as of April 1, 2004]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 26CFR1.460-1]

[Page 197-206]
 
                       TITLE 26--INTERNAL REVENUE
 
    CHAPTER I--INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 
                               (CONTINUED)
 
PART 1_INCOME TAXES--Table of Contents
 
Sec. 1.460-1  Long-term contracts.

    (a) Overview--(1) In general. This section provides rules for 
determining whether a contract for the manufacture, building, 
installation, or construction of property is a long-term contract under 
section 460 and what activities must be accounted for as a single long-
term contract. Specific rules for long-term manufacturing and 
construction contracts are provided in Sec. Sec. 1.460-2 and 1.460-3, 
respectively. A taxpayer generally must determine the income from a 
long-term contract using the percentage-of-completion method described 
in Sec. 1.460-4(b) (PCM) and the cost allocation rules described in 
Sec. 1.460-5(b) or (c). In addition, after a contract subject to the 
PCM is completed, a taxpayer generally must apply the look-back method 
described in Sec. 1.460-6 to determine the amount of interest owed on 
any hypothetical underpayment of tax, or earned on any hypothetical 
overpayment of tax, attributable to accounting for the long-term 
contract under the PCM.
    (2) Exceptions to required use of PCM--(i) Exempt construction 
contract. The requirement to use the PCM does not apply to any exempt 
construction contract described in Sec. 1.460-3(b). Thus, a taxpayer 
may determine the income from an exempt construction contract using any 
accounting method permitted by Sec. 1.460-4(c) and, for contracts 
accounted for using the completed-contract method (CCM), any cost 
allocation method permitted by Sec. 1.460-5(d). Exempt construction 
contracts that are not subject to the PCM or CCM are not subject to the 
cost allocation rules of Sec. 1.460-5 except for the production-period 
interest rules of Sec. 1.460-5(b)(2)(v). Exempt construction 
contractors that are large homebuilders described in

[[Page 198]]

Sec. 1.460-5(d)(3) must capitalize costs under section 263A. All other 
exempt construction contractors must account for the cost of 
construction using the appropriate rules contained in other sections of 
the Internal Revenue Code or regulations.
    (ii) Qualified ship or residential construction contract. The 
requirement to use the PCM applies only to a portion of a qualified ship 
contract described in Sec. 1.460-2(d) or residential construction 
contract described in Sec. 1.460-3(c). A taxpayer generally may 
determine the income from a qualified ship contract or residential 
construction contract using the percentage-of-completion/capitalized-
cost method (PCCM) described in Sec. 1.460-4(e), but must use a cost 
allocation method described in Sec. 1.460-5(b) for the entire contract.
    (b) Terms--(1) Long-term contract. A long-term contract generally is 
any contract for the manufacture, building, installation, or 
construction of property if the contract is not completed within the 
contracting year, as defined in paragraph (b)(5) of this section. 
However, a contract for the manufacture of property is a long-term 
contract only if it also satisfies either the unique item or 12-month 
requirements described in Sec. 1.460-2. A contract for the manufacture 
of personal property is a manufacturing contract. In contrast, a 
contract for the building, installation, or construction of real 
property is a construction contract.
    (2) Contract for the manufacture, building, installation, or 
construction of property--(i) In general. A contract is a contract for 
the manufacture, building, installation, or construction of property if 
the manufacture, building, installation, or construction of property is 
necessary for the taxpayer's contractual obligations to be fulfilled and 
if the manufacture, building, installation, or construction of that 
property has not been completed when the parties enter into the 
contract. If a taxpayer has to manufacture or construct an item to 
fulfill its obligations under the contract, the fact that the taxpayer 
is not required to deliver that item to the customer is not relevant. 
Whether the customer has title to, control over, or bears the risk of 
loss from, the property manufactured or constructed by the taxpayer also 
is not relevant. Furthermore, how the parties characterize their 
agreement (e.g., as a contract for the sale of property) is not 
relevant.
    (ii) De minimis construction activities. Notwithstanding paragraph 
(b)(2)(i) of this section, a contract is not a construction contract 
under section 460 if the contract includes the provision of land by the 
taxpayer and the estimated total allocable contract costs, as defined in 
paragraph (b)(3) of this section, attributable to the taxpayer's 
construction activities are less than 10 percent of the contract's total 
contract price, as defined in Sec. 1.460-4(b)(4)(i). For the purposes 
of this paragraph (b)(2)(ii), the allocable contract costs attributable 
to the taxpayer's construction activities do not include the cost of the 
land provided to the customer. In addition, a contract's estimated total 
allocable contract costs include a proportionate share of the estimated 
cost of any common improvement that benefits the subject matter of the 
contract if the taxpayer is contractually obligated, or required by law, 
to construct the common improvement.
    (3) Allocable contract costs. Allocable contract costs are costs 
that are allocable to a long-term contract under Sec. 1.460-5.
    (4) Related party. A related party is a person whose relationship to 
a taxpayer is described in section 707(b) or 267(b), determined without 
regard to section 267(f)(1)(A) and determined by replacing ``at least 80 
percent'' with ``more than 50 percent'' for the purposes of determining 
the ownership of the stock of a corporation in sections 267(b)(2), (8), 
(10)(A), and (12).
    (5) Contracting year. The contracting year is the taxable year in 
which a taxpayer enters into a contract as described in paragraph (c)(2) 
of this section.
    (6) Completion year. The completion year is the taxable year in 
which a taxpayer completes a contract as described in paragraph (c)(3) 
of this section.
    (7) Contract commencement date. The contract commencement date is 
the date that a taxpayer or related party first incurs any allocable 
contract costs, such as design and engineering costs,

[[Page 199]]

other than expenses attributable to bidding and negotiating activities. 
Generally, the contract commencement date is relevant in applying Sec. 
1.460-6(b)(3) (concerning the de minimis exception to the look-back 
method under section 460(b)(3)(B)); Sec. 1.460-5(b)(2)(v)(B)(1)(i) 
(concerning the production period subject to interest allocation); Sec. 
1.460-2(d) (concerning qualified ship contracts); and Sec. 1.460-
3(b)(1)(ii) (concerning the construction period for exempt construction 
contracts).
    (8) Incurred. Incurred has the meaning given in Sec. 1.461-1(a)(2) 
(concerning the taxable year a liability is incurred under the accrual 
method of accounting), regardless of a taxpayer's overall method of 
accounting. See Sec. 1.461-4(d)(2)(ii) for economic performance rules 
concerning the PCM.
    (9) Independent research and development expenses. Independent 
research and development expenses are any expenses incurred in the 
performance of research or development, except that this term does not 
include any expenses that are directly attributable to a particular 
long-term contract in existence when the expenses are incurred and this 
term does not include any expenses under an agreement to perform 
research or development.
    (10) Long-term contract methods of accounting. Long-term contract 
methods of accounting, which include the PCM, the CCM, the PCCM, and the 
exempt-contract percentage-of-completion method (EPCM), are methods of 
accounting that may be used only for long-term contracts.
    (c) Entering into and completing long-term contracts--(1) In 
general. To determine when a contract is entered into under paragraph 
(c)(2) of this section and completed under paragraph (c)(3) of this 
section, a taxpayer must consider all relevant allocable contract costs 
incurred and activities performed by itself, by related parties on its 
behalf, and by the customer, that are incident to or necessary for the 
long-term contract. In addition, to determine whether a contract is 
completed in the contracting year, the taxpayer may not consider when it 
expects to complete the contract.
    (2) Date contract entered into--(i) In general. A taxpayer enters 
into a contract on the date that the contract binds both the taxpayer 
and the customer under applicable law, even if the contract is subject 
to unsatisfied conditions not within the taxpayer's control (such as 
obtaining financing). If a taxpayer delays entering into a contract for 
a principal purpose of avoiding section 460, however, the taxpayer will 
be treated as having entered into a contract not later than the contract 
commencement date.
    (ii) Options and change orders. A taxpayer enters into a new 
contract on the date that the customer exercises an option or similar 
provision in a contract if that option or similar provision must be 
severed from the contract under paragraph (e) of this section. 
Similarly, a taxpayer enters into a new contract on the date that it 
accepts a change order or other similar agreement if the change order or 
other similar agreement must be severed from the contract under 
paragraph (e) of this section.
    (3) Date contract completed--(i) In general. A taxpayer's contract 
is completed upon the earlier of--
    (A) Use of the subject matter of the contract by the customer for 
its intended purpose (other than for testing) and at least 95 percent of 
the total allocable contract costs attributable to the subject matter 
have been incurred by the taxpayer; or
    (B) Final completion and acceptance of the subject matter of the 
contract.
    (ii) Secondary items. The date a contract accounted for using the 
CCM is completed is determined without regard to whether one or more 
secondary items have been used or finally completed and accepted. If any 
secondary items are incomplete at the end of the taxable year in which 
the primary subject matter of a contract is completed, the taxpayer must 
separate the portion of the gross contract price and the allocable 
contract costs attributable to the incomplete secondary item(s) from the 
completed contract and account for them using a permissible method of 
accounting. A permissible method of accounting includes a long-term 
contract method of accounting only if a separate contract for the 
secondary item(s)

[[Page 200]]

would be a long-term contract, as defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this 
section.
    (iii) Subcontracts. In the case of a subcontract, a subcontractor's 
customer is the general contractor. Thus, the subject matter of the 
subcontract is the relevant subject matter under paragraph (c)(3)(i) of 
this section.
    (iv) Final completion and acceptance--(A) In general. Except as 
otherwise provided in this paragraph (c)(3)(iv), to determine whether 
final completion and acceptance of the subject matter of a contract have 
occurred, a taxpayer must consider all relevant facts and circumstances. 
Nevertheless, a taxpayer may not delay the completion of a contract for 
the principal purpose of deferring federal income tax.
    (B) Contingent compensation. Final completion and acceptance is 
determined without regard to any contractual term that provides for 
additional compensation that is contingent on the successful performance 
of the subject matter of the contract. A taxpayer must account for all 
contingent compensation that is not includible in total contract price 
under Sec. 1.460-4(b)(4)(i), or in gross contract price under Sec. 
1.460-4(d)(3), using a permissible method of accounting. For application 
of the look-back method for contracts accounted for using the PCM, see 
Sec. 1.460-6(c)(1)(ii) and (2)(vi).
    (C) Assembly or installation. Final completion and acceptance is 
determined without regard to whether the taxpayer has an obligation to 
assist or supervise assembly or installation of the subject matter of 
the contract where the assembly or installation is not performed by the 
taxpayer or a related party. A taxpayer must account for the gross 
receipts and costs attributable to such an obligation using a 
permissible method of accounting, other than a long-term contract 
method.
    (D) Disputes. Final completion and acceptance is determined without 
regard to whether a dispute exists at the time the taxpayer tenders the 
subject matter of the contract to the customer. For contracts accounted 
for using the CCM, see Sec. 1.460-4(d)(4). For application of the look-
back method for contracts accounted for using the PCM, see Sec. 1.460-
6(c)(1)(ii) and (2)(vi).
    (d) Allocation among activities--(1) In general. Long-term contract 
methods of accounting apply only to the gross receipts and costs 
attributable to long-term contract activities. Gross receipts and costs 
attributable to long-term contract activities means amounts included in 
total contract price or gross contract price, whichever is applicable, 
as determined under Sec. 1.460-4, and costs allocable to the contract, 
as determined under Sec. 1.460-5. Gross receipts and costs attributable 
to non-long-term contract activities (as defined in paragraph (d)(2) of 
this section) generally must be taken into account using a permissible 
method of accounting other than a long-term contract method. See section 
446(c) and Sec. 1.446-1(c). However, if the performance of a non-long-
term contract activity is incident to or necessary for the manufacture, 
building, installation, or construction of the subject matter of one or 
more of the taxpayer's long-term contracts, the gross receipts and costs 
attributable to that activity must be allocated to the long-term 
contract(s) benefitted as provided in Sec. Sec. 1.460-4(b)(4)(i) and 
1.460-5(f)(2), respectively. Similarly, if a single long-term contract 
requires a taxpayer to perform a non-long-term contract activity that is 
not incident to or necessary for the manufacture, building, 
installation, or construction of the subject matter of the long-term 
contract, the gross receipts and costs attributable to that non-long-
term contract activity must be separated from the contract and accounted 
for using a permissible method of accounting other than a long-term 
contract method. But see paragraph (g) of this section for related party 
rules.
    (2) Non-long-term contract activity. Non-long-term contract activity 
means the performance of an activity other than manufacturing, building, 
installation, or construction, such as the provision of architectural, 
design, engineering, and construction management services, and the 
development or implementation of computer software. In

[[Page 201]]

addition, performance under a guaranty, warranty, or maintenance 
agreement is a non-long-term contract activity that is never incident to 
or necessary for the manufacture or construction of property under a 
long-term contract.
    (e) Severing and aggregating contracts--(1) In general. After 
application of the allocation rules of paragraph (d) of this section, 
the severing and aggregating rules of this paragraph (e) may be applied 
by the Commissioner or the taxpayer as necessary to clearly reflect 
income (e.g., to prevent the unreasonable deferral (or acceleration) of 
income or the premature recognition (or deferral) of loss). Under the 
severing and aggregating rules, one agreement may be treated as two or 
more contracts, and two or more agreements may be treated as one 
contract. Except as provided in paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of this section, a 
taxpayer must determine whether to sever an agreement or to aggregate 
two or more agreements based on the facts and circumstances known at the 
end of the contracting year.
    (2) Facts and circumstances. Whether an agreement should be severed, 
or two or more agreements should be aggregated, depends on the following 
factors:
    (i) Pricing. Independent pricing of items in an agreement is 
necessary for the agreement to be severed into two or more contracts. In 
the case of an agreement for similar items, if the price to be paid for 
the items is determined under different terms or formulas (e.g., if some 
items are priced under a cost-plus incentive fee arrangement and later 
items are to be priced under a fixed-price arrangement), then the 
difference in the pricing terms or formulas indicates that the items are 
independently priced. Similarly, interdependent pricing of items in 
separate agreements is necessary for two or more agreements to be 
aggregated into one contract. A single price negotiation for similar 
items ordered under one or more agreements indicates that the items are 
interdependently priced.
    (ii) Separate delivery or acceptance. An agreement may not be 
severed into two or more contracts unless it provides for separate 
delivery or separate acceptance of items that are the subject matter of 
the agreement. However, the separate delivery or separate acceptance of 
items by itself does not necessarily require an agreement to be severed.
    (iii) Reasonable businessperson. Two or more agreements to perform 
manufacturing or construction activities may not be aggregated into one 
contract unless a reasonable businessperson would not have entered into 
one of the agreements for the terms agreed upon without also entering 
into the other agreement(s). Similarly, an agreement to perform 
manufacturing or construction activities may not be severed into two or 
more contracts if a reasonable businessperson would not have entered 
into separate agreements containing terms allocable to each severed 
contract. Analyzing the reasonable businessperson standard requires an 
analysis of all the facts and circumstances of the business arrangement 
between the taxpayer and the customer. For purposes of this paragraph 
(e)(2)(iii), a taxpayer's expectation that the parties would enter into 
another agreement, when agreeing to the terms contained in the first 
agreement, is not relevant.
    (3) Exceptions--(i) Severance for PCM. A taxpayer may not sever 
under this paragraph (e) a long-term contract that would be subject to 
the PCM without obtaining the Commissioner's prior written consent.
    (ii) Options and change orders. Except as provided in paragraph 
(e)(3)(i) of this section, a taxpayer must sever an agreement that 
increases the number of units to be supplied to the customer, such as 
through the exercise of an option or the acceptance of a change order, 
if the agreement provides for separate delivery or separate acceptance 
of the additional units.
    (4) Statement with return. If a taxpayer severs an agreement or 
aggregates two or more agreements under this paragraph (e) during the 
taxable year, the taxpayer must attach a statement to its original 
federal income tax return for that year. This statement must contain the 
following information--
    (i) The legend NOTIFICATION OF SEVERANCE OR AGGREGATION UNDER SEC. 
1.460-1(e);
    (ii) The taxpayer's name; and

[[Page 202]]

    (iii) The taxpayer's employer identification number or social 
security number.
    (f) Classifying contracts--(1) In general. After applying the 
severing and aggregating rules of paragraph (e) of this section, a 
taxpayer must determine the classification of a contract (e.g., as a 
long-term manufacturing contract, long-term construction contract, non-
long-term contract) based on all the facts and circumstances known no 
later than the end of the contracting year. Classification is determined 
on a contract-by-contract basis. Consequently, a requirement to 
manufacture a single unique item under a long-term contract will subject 
all other items in that contract to section 460.
    (2) Hybrid contracts--(i) In general. A long-term contract that 
requires a taxpayer to perform both manufacturing and construction 
activities (hybrid contract) generally must be classified as two 
contracts, a manufacturing contract and a construction contract. A 
taxpayer may elect, on a contract-by-contract basis, to classify a 
hybrid contract as a long-term construction contract if at least 95 
percent of the estimated total allocable contract costs are reasonably 
allocable to construction activities. In addition, a taxpayer may elect, 
on a contract-by-contract basis, to classify a hybrid contract as a 
long-term manufacturing contract subject to the PCM.
    (ii) Elections. A taxpayer makes an election under this paragraph 
(f)(2) by using its method of accounting for similar construction 
contracts or for manufacturing contracts, whichever is applicable, to 
account for a hybrid contract entered into during the taxable year of 
the election on its original federal income tax return for the election 
year. If an electing taxpayer's method is the PCM, the taxpayer also 
must use the PCM to apply the look-back method under Sec. 1.460-6 and 
to determine alternative minimum taxable income under Sec. 1.460-4(f).
    (3) Method of accounting. Except as provided in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) 
of this section, a taxpayer's method of classifying contracts is a 
method of accounting under section 446 and, thus, may not be changed 
without the Commissioner's consent. If a taxpayer's method of 
classifying contracts is unreasonable, that classification method is an 
impermissible accounting method.
    (4) Use of estimates--(i) Estimating length of contract. A taxpayer 
must use a reasonable estimate of the time required to complete a 
contract when necessary to classify the contract (e.g., to determine 
whether the five-year completion rule for qualified ship contracts under 
Sec. 1.460-2(d), or the two-year completion rule for exempt 
construction contracts under Sec. 1.460-3(b), is satisfied, but not to 
determine whether a contract is completed within the contracting year 
under paragraph (b)(1) of this section). To be considered reasonable, an 
estimate of the time required to complete the contract must include 
anticipated time for delay, rework, change orders, technology or design 
problems, or other problems that reasonably can be anticipated 
considering the nature of the contract and prior experience. A contract 
term that specifies an expected completion or delivery date may be 
considered evidence that the taxpayer reasonably expects to complete or 
deliver the subject matter of the contract on or about the date 
specified, especially if the contract provides bona fide penalties for 
failing to meet the specified date. If a taxpayer classifies a contract 
based on a reasonable estimate of completion time, the contract will not 
be reclassified based on the actual (or another reasonable estimate of) 
completion time. A taxpayer's estimate of completion time will not be 
considered unreasonable if a contract is not completed within the 
estimated time primarily because of unforeseeable factors not within the 
taxpayer's control, such as third-party litigation, extreme weather 
conditions, strikes, or delays in securing permits or licenses.
    (ii) Estimating allocable contract costs. A taxpayer must use a 
reasonable estimate of total allocable contract costs when necessary to 
classify the contract (e.g., to determine whether a contract is a home 
construction contract under Sec. 1.460-(3)(b)(2)). If a taxpayer 
classifies a contract based on a reasonable estimate of total allocable 
contract costs, the contract will not be reclassified

[[Page 203]]

based on the actual (or another reasonable estimate of) total allocable 
contract costs.
    (g) Special rules for activities benefitting long-term contracts of 
a related party--(1) Related party use of PCM--(i) In general. Except as 
provided in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section, if a related party and 
its customer enter into a long-term contract subject to the PCM, and a 
taxpayer performs any activity that is incident to or necessary for the 
related party's long-term contract, the taxpayer must account for the 
gross receipts and costs attributable to this activity using the PCM, 
even if this activity is not otherwise subject to section 460(a). This 
type of activity may include, for example, the performance of 
engineering and design services, and the production of components and 
subassemblies that are reasonably expected to be used in the production 
of the subject matter of the related party's contract.
    (ii) Exception for components and subassemblies. A taxpayer is not 
required to use the PCM under this paragraph (g) to account for a 
component or subassembly that benefits a related party's long-term 
contract if more than 50 percent of the average annual gross receipts 
attributable to the sale of this item for the 3-taxable-year-period 
ending with the contracting year comes from unrelated parties.
    (2) Total contract price. If a taxpayer is required to use the PCM 
under paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this section, the total contract price (as 
defined in Sec. 1.460-4(b)(4)(i)) is the fair market value of the 
taxpayer's activity that is incident to or necessary for the performance 
of the related party's long-term contract. The related party also must 
use the fair market value of the taxpayer's activity as the cost it 
incurs for the activity. The fair market value of the taxpayer's 
activity may or may not be the same as the amount the related party pays 
the taxpayer for that activity.
    (3) Completion factor. To compute a contract's completion factor (as 
described in Sec. 1.460-4(b)(5)), the related party must take into 
account the fair market value of the taxpayer's activity that is 
incident to or necessary for the performance of the related party's 
long-term contract when the related party incurs the liability to the 
taxpayer for the activity, rather than when the taxpayer incurs the 
costs to perform the activity.
    (h) Effective date--(1) In general. Except as otherwise provided, 
this section and Sec. Sec. 1.460-2 through 1.460-5 are applicable for 
contracts entered into on or after January 11, 2001.
    (2) Change in method of accounting. Any change in a taxpayer's 
method of accounting necessary to comply with this section and 
Sec. Sec. 1.460-2 through 1.460-5 is a change in method of accounting 
to which the provisions of section 446 and the regulations thereunder 
apply. For the first taxable year that includes January 11, 2001, a 
taxpayer is granted the consent of the Commissioner to change its method 
of accounting to comply with the provisions of this section and 
Sec. Sec. 1.460-2 through 1.460-5 for long-term contracts entered into 
on or after January 11, 2001. A taxpayer that wants to change its method 
of accounting under this paragraph (h)(2) must follow the automatic 
consent procedures in Rev. Proc. 99-49 (1999-52 I.R.B. 725) (see Sec. 
601.601(d)(2) of this chapter), except that the scope limitations in 
section 4.02 of Rev. Proc. 99-49 do not apply. Because a change under 
this paragraph (h)(2) is made on a cut-off basis, a section 481(a) 
adjustment is not permitted or required. Moreover, the taxpayer does not 
receive audit protection under section 7 of Rev. Proc. 99-49 for a 
change in method of accounting under this paragraph (h)(2). A taxpayer 
that wants to change its exempt-contract method of accounting is not 
granted the consent of the Commissioner under this paragraph (h)(2) and 
must file a Form 3115, ``Application for Change in Accounting Method,'' 
to obtain consent. See Rev. Proc. 97-27 (1997-1 C.B. 680) (see Sec. 
601.601(d)(2) of this chapter).
    (i) [Reserved]
    (j) Examples. The following examples illustrate the rules of this 
section:

    Example 1. Contract for manufacture of property. B notifies C, an 
aircraft manufacturer, that it wants to purchase an aircraft of a 
particular type. At the time C receives the order, C has on hand several 
partially completed aircraft of this type; however, C does not have any 
completed aircraft of this type on hand. C and B agree that B will 
purchase

[[Page 204]]

one of these aircraft after it has been completed. C retains title to 
and risk of loss with respect to the aircraft until the sale takes 
place. The agreement between C and B is a contract for the manufacture 
of property under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, even if labeled 
as a contract for the sale of property, because the manufacture of the 
aircraft is necessary for C's obligations under the agreement to be 
fulfilled and the manufacturing was not complete when B and C entered 
into the agreement.
    Example 2. De minimis construction activity. C, a master developer 
whose taxable year ends December 31, owns 5,000 acres of undeveloped 
land with a cost basis of $5,000,000 and a fair market value of 
$50,000,000. To obtain permission from the local county government to 
improve this land, a service road must be constructed on this land to 
benefit all 5,000 acres. In 2001, C enters into a contract to sell a 
1,000-acre parcel of undeveloped land to B, a residential developer, for 
its fair market value, $10,000,000. In this contract, C agrees to 
construct a service road running through the land that C is selling to B 
and through the 4,000 adjacent acres of undeveloped land that C has sold 
or will sell to other residential developers for its fair market value, 
$40,000,000. C reasonably estimates that it will incur allocable 
contract costs of $50,000 (excluding the cost of the land) to construct 
this service road, which will be owned and maintained by the county. C 
must reasonably allocate the cost of the service road among the 
benefitted parcels. The portion of the estimated total allocable 
contract costs that C allocates to the 1,000-acre parcel being sold to B 
(based upon its fair market value) is $10,000 ($50,000x($10,000,000/
$50,000,000)). Construction of the service road is finished in 2002. 
Because the estimated total allocable contract costs attributable to C's 
construction activities, $10,000, are less than 10 percent of the 
contract's total contract price, $10,000,000, C's contract with B is not 
a construction contract under paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section. 
Thus, C's contract with B is not a long-term contract under paragraph 
(b)(2)(i) of this section, notwithstanding that construction of the 
service road is not completed in 2001.
    Example 3. Completion--customer use. In 2002, C, whose taxable year 
ends December 31, enters into a contract to construct a building for B. 
In November of 2003, the building is completed in every respect 
necessary for its intended use, and B occupies the building. In early 
December of 2003, B notifies C of some minor deficiencies that need to 
be corrected, and C agrees to correct them in January 2004. C reasonably 
estimates that the cost of correcting these deficiencies will be less 
than five percent of the total allocable contract costs. C's contract is 
complete under paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of this section in 2003 because in 
that year, B used the building and C had incurred at least 95 percent of 
the total allocable contract costs attributable to the building. C must 
use a permissible method of accounting for any deficiency-related costs 
incurred after 2003.
    Example 4. Completion--customer use. In 2001, C, whose taxable year 
ends December 31, agrees to construct a shopping center, which includes 
an adjoining parking lot, for B. By October 2002, C has finished 
constructing the retail portion of the shopping center. By December 
2002, C has graded the entire parking lot, but has paved only one-fourth 
of it because inclement weather conditions prevented C from laying 
asphalt on the remaining three-fourths. In December 2002, B opens the 
retail portion of the shopping center and the paved portion of the 
parking lot to the general public. C reasonably estimates that the cost 
of paving the remaining three-fourths of the parking lot when weather 
permits will exceed five percent of C's total allocable contract costs. 
Even though B is using the subject matter of the contract, C's contract 
is not completed in December 2002 under paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of this 
section because C has not incurred at least 95 percent of the total 
allocable contract costs attributable to the subject matter.
    Example 5. Completion--customer use. In 2001, C, whose taxable year 
ends December 31, agrees to manufacture 100 machines for B. By December 
31, 2002, C has delivered 99 of the machines to B. C reasonably 
estimates that the cost of finishing the related work on the contract 
will be less than five percent of the total allocable contract costs. 
C's contract is not complete under paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of this 
section in 2002 because in that year, B is not using the subject matter 
of the contract (all 100 machines) for its intended purpose.
    Example 6. Non-long-term contract activity. On January 1, 2001, C, 
whose taxable year ends December 31, enters into a single long-term 
contract to design and manufacture a satellite and to develop computer 
software enabling B to operate the satellite. At the end of 2001, C has 
not finished manufacturing the satellite. Designing the satellite and 
developing the computer software are non-long-term contract activities 
that are incident to and necessary for the taxpayer's manufacturing of 
the subject matter of a long-term contract because the satellite could 
not be manufactured without the design and would not operate without the 
software. Thus, under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, C must allocate 
these non-long-term contract activities to the long-term contract and 
account for the gross receipts and costs attributable to designing the 
satellite and developing computer software using the PCM.
    Example 7. Non-long-term contract activity. C agrees to manufacture 
equipment for B

[[Page 205]]

under a long-term contract. In a separate contract, C agrees to design 
the equipment being manufactured for B under the long-term contract. 
Under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, C must allocate the gross 
receipts and costs related to the design to the long-term contract 
because designing the equipment is a non-long-term contract activity 
that is incident to and necessary for the manufacture of the subject 
matter of the long-term contract.
    Example 8. Severance. On January 1, 2001, C, a construction 
contractor, and B, a real estate investor, enter into an agreement 
requiring C to build two office buildings in different areas of a large 
city. The agreement provides that the two office buildings will be 
completed by C and accepted by B in 2002 and 2003, respectively, and 
that C will be paid $1,000,000 and $1,500,000 for the two office 
buildings, respectively. The agreement will provide C with a reasonable 
profit from the construction of each building. Unless C is required to 
use the PCM to account for the contract, C is required to sever this 
contract under paragraph (e)(2) of this section because the buildings 
are independently priced, the agreement provides for separate delivery 
and acceptance of the buildings, and, as each building will generate a 
reasonable profit, a reasonable businessperson would have entered into 
separate agreements for the terms agreed upon for each building.
    Example 9. Severance. C, a large construction contractor whose 
taxable year ends December 31, accounts for its construction contracts 
using the PCM and has elected to use the 10-percent method described in 
Sec. 1.460-4(b)(6). In September 2001, C enters into an agreement to 
construct four buildings in four different cities. The buildings are 
independently priced and the contract provides a reasonable profit for 
each of the buildings. In addition, the agreement requires C to complete 
one building per year in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005. As of December 31, 
2001, C has incurred 25 percent of the estimated total allocable 
contract costs attributable to one of the buildings, but only five 
percent of the estimated total allocable contract costs attributable to 
all four buildings included in the agreement. C does not request the 
Commissioner's consent to sever this contract. Using the 10-percent 
method, C does not take into account any portion of the total contract 
price or any incurred allocable contract costs attributable to this 
agreement in 2001. Upon examination of C's 2001 tax return, the 
Commissioner determines that C entered into one agreement for four 
buildings rather than four separate agreements each for one building 
solely to take advantage of the deferral obtained under the 10-percent 
method. Consequently, to clearly reflect the taxpayer's income, the 
Commissioner may require C to sever the agreement into four separate 
contracts under paragraph (e)(2) of this section because the buildings 
are independently priced, the agreement provides for separate delivery 
and acceptance of the buildings, and a reasonable businessperson would 
have entered into separate agreements for these buildings.
    Example 10. Aggregation. In 2001, C, a shipbuilder, enters into two 
agreements with the Department of the Navy as the result of a single 
negotiation. Each agreement obligates C to manufacture a submarine. 
Because the submarines are of the same class, their specifications are 
similar. Because C has never manufactured submarines of this class, 
however, C anticipates that it will incur substantially higher costs to 
manufacture the first submarine, to be delivered in 2007, than to 
manufacture the second submarine, to be delivered in 2010. If the 
agreements are treated as separate contracts, the first contract 
probably will produce a substantial loss, while the second contract 
probably will produce substantial profit. Based upon these facts, 
aggregation is required under paragraph (e)(2) of this section because 
the submarines are interdependently priced and a reasonable 
businessperson would not have entered the first agreement without also 
entering into the second.
    Example 11. Aggregation. In 2001, C, a manufacturer of aircraft and 
related equipment, agrees to manufacture 10 military aircraft for 
foreign government B and to deliver the aircraft by the end of 2003. 
When entering into the agreement, C anticipates that it might receive 
production orders from B over the next 20 years for as many as 300 more 
of these aircraft. The negotiated contract price reflects C's and B's 
consideration of the expected total cost of manufacturing the 10 
aircraft, the risks and opportunities associated with the agreement, and 
the additional factors the parties considered relevant. The negotiated 
price provides a profit on the sale of the 10 aircraft even if C does 
not receive any additional production orders from B. It is unlikely, 
however, that C actually would have wanted to manufacture the 10 
aircraft but for the expectation that it would receive additional 
production orders from B. In 2003, B accepts delivery of the 10 
aircraft. At that time, B orders an additional 20 aircraft of the same 
type for delivery in 2007. When negotiating the price for the additional 
20 aircraft, C and B consider the fact that the expected unit cost for 
this production run of 20 aircraft will be lower than the unit cost of 
the 10 aircraft completed and accepted in 2003, but substantially higher 
than the expected unit cost of future production runs. Based upon these 
facts, aggregation is not permitted under paragraph (e)(2) of this 
section. Because the parties negotiated the prices of both agreements 
considering only the expected production costs and risks for each 
agreement standing alone, the terms and conditions agreed upon for the 
first

[[Page 206]]

agreement are independent of the terms and conditions agreed upon for 
the second agreement. The fact that the agreement to manufacture 10 
aircraft provides a profit for C indicates that a reasonable 
businessperson would have entered into that agreement without entering 
into the agreement to manufacture the additional 20 aircraft.
    Example 12. Classification and completion. In 2001, C, whose taxable 
year ends December 31, agrees to manufacture and install an industrial 
machine for B. C elects under paragraph (f) of this section to classify 
the agreement as a long-term manufacturing contract and to account for 
it using the PCM. The agreement requires C to deliver the machine in 
August 2003 and to install and test the machine in B's factory. In 
addition, the agreement requires B to accept the machine when the tests 
prove that the machine's performance will satisfy the environmental 
standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), even if B 
has not obtained the required operating permit. Because of technical 
difficulties, C cannot deliver the machine until December 2003, when B 
conditionally accepts delivery. C installs the machine in December 2003 
and then tests it through February 2004. B accepts the machine in 
February 2004, but does not obtain the operating permit from the EPA 
until January 2005. Under paragraph (c)(3)(i)(B) of this section, C's 
contract is finally completed and accepted in February 2004, even though 
B does not obtain the operating permit until January 2005, because C 
completed all its obligations under the contract and B accepted the 
machine in February 2004.

[T.D. 8929, 66 FR 2225, Jan. 11, 2001; 66 FR 18357, Apr. 6, 2001]