Identifying the period when a business benefits from advertising expenditures has proven to be difficult. Because of the difficulty in allocating expenses to a particular period, tax authorities provide for the current deduction of advertising expense even though it is reasonable to expect future benefits from the activities. In 1998, citing case history, administrative pronouncements, and the definition of advertising, the Tax Court allowed the immediate deduction of the costs for the graphic design of cigarette packaging incurred by R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Internal Revenue Service did not acquiesce to the Tax Court's decision, and we can expect the deduction of advertising expense, especially graphic design, to remain an interesting and challenging issue.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
1 December 2003
Research Article|
January 01 2003
Graphic Design: Is It Just Another Advertising Expense? Available to Purchase
Diane A. Riordan, Professor;
Diane A. Riordan, Professor
aJames Madison University.
Search for other works by this author on:
Michael P. Riordan, Professor;
Michael P. Riordan, Professor
aJames Madison University.
Search for other works by this author on:
Scott N. Cairns, Professor
Scott N. Cairns, Professor
bShippensburg University.
Search for other works by this author on:
American Accounting Association
2003
The ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research (2003) 1 (1): 54–63.
Citation
Diane A. Riordan, Michael P. Riordan, Scott N. Cairns; Graphic Design: Is It Just Another Advertising Expense?. The ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research 1 December 2003; 1 (1): 54–63. https://doi.org/10.2308/jltr.2003.1.1.54
Download citation file:
Pay-Per-View Access
$25.00
1
Views