Permanent Attachments Decisions
Whiteco’s six questions decide whether an affixed item is an inherently permanent structure. They are a Tax Court test, not a statute. How something is bolted down is evidence, not the whole inquiry. L.L. Bean and King Radio mark opposite ends of the same scale.
Educational information, not tax advice.
Updated 2026-10-14
Key takeaways
- Permanence is a six-factor inquiry. No one factor controls. The questions are not a statute.
- The regulation says local fixture law is not controlling.
- King Radio allowed a screw-in partition system that had been designed to move. L.L. Bean kept a theoretically movable rack that actually held up the building.
- Educational information, not tax advice.
Whiteco Industries, Inc. v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 664 (1975), asked whether signs set in concrete were inherently permanent. They were not. The court looked at movability, design, intended duration, difficulty of removal, damage on removal, and method of affixation. HCA applied those questions inside hospitals. The questions remain a Tax Court test for inherent permanence. They do not repeal Treas. Reg. §1.48-1(e)(2)’s structural-component list.
King Radio Corp. v. United States, 486 F.2d 1091 (10th Cir. 1973), is the movable-interior example. Partitions slid into aluminum channels fastened with small screws or masonry nails. They carried no load. Storage and reuse were the point of the system. The Tenth Circuit applied a permanency approach and held the system was personal property. It refused a pure “function” test that would have treated every space divider as a wall.
L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Commissioner, 145 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 1998), is the other pole. The reserve-facility racks were anchor-bolted, fifty feet high, and designed to support roof and walls. The mezzanine would take weeks to strip and was tied to sprinklers, power, and cable. The First Circuit said movability is not the key determinant of lack of permanence. A facility designed for the site as a permanent addition, and expensive to move, can be inherently permanent even if a contractor could eventually unbolt it.
Trentadue v. Commissioner, 128 T.C. 91 (2007), applied Whiteco to vineyard property, as described in the audit guide: trellises one way, buried irrigation and a well the other. That opinion’s inventory URL did not open on this pass. AmeriSouth repeated the L.L. Bean lesson for apartment shelves and closet rods: the taxpayer showed they could be moved and did not show they had been moved or were intended to be reused. Metro used original-plan integration as a permanence marker for atrium walls and lawn sprinkler heads.
“It can be unscrewed” is not the test. A structural component can be removed. The question is how the item functions and whether it is part of the building’s operation or maintenance. Readily removable floor covering is treated as personal property in several IRS matrices; ceramic tile is not. Those matrix rows are examiner guidance, not a holding. Super Intelligence is proposed only. This page is educational information, not tax advice.
Common error
Treating Whiteco as a statute, or as a single-factor movability test, misstates the opinion. The six questions are a facts-and-circumstances list. Design for permanence and integration with the structure can outweigh theoretical removability, as L.L. Bean held.
Local law
Treas. Reg. §1.48-1(c) says local law is not controlling. A fixture under state law can still be personal property for depreciation classification, and a movable item under a contractor’s brochure can still be a structural component.
How to use this page
Walk the Whiteco questions in order and answer them from the building’s record, not from a catalog photo. Has this item actually been moved? Was it designed to stay for the life of the building? What happens to the room if it comes out? King Radio’s partitions had a reuse purpose and left nail holes. L.L. Bean’s racks were the walls. AmeriSouth’s closet rods could be taken down and had never been reused.
Do not call the six questions a statute. They are a Tax Court test for inherent permanence. A listed structural component can still be personal property in unusual circumstances, as Scott Paper said about items that do not relate to operation or maintenance of the building. The reverse is also true: an unscrewed item can still be structural.
Trentadue’s vineyard application is flagged because the inventory URL timed out. Educational information, not tax advice.
Limits and flags
Whiteco’s six questions are a Tax Court test for whether property is inherently permanent. They are not a statute and they are not the only test: a listed structural component can still be personal property in unusual circumstances, and an unscrewed item can still be structural. Treas. Reg. §1.48-1(c) says local fixture law does not control.
King Radio is a reusable channel system that left nail holes. L.L. Bean is a rack that was the building. AmeriSouth’s closet rods could be taken down and had never been reused; that apartment record has no named URL (flag F-21). Trentadue stays conservative because the inventory URL timed out.
Super Intelligence is proposed only. Educational information, not tax advice.
Practice note
Answer the six Whiteco questions from the building’s file: has it moved, was it designed to stay, how long was it expected to stay, how hard is removal, what breaks, and how is it fastened. Then ask the regulation question: does it relate to operation or maintenance of the building? An unscrewed item can still be structural. A listed item can still be personal property in unusual circumstances.
King Radio had reuse and nail holes. L.L. Bean had a roof sitting on the racks. AmeriSouth had closet rods that could come down and never had. Those three records are why “it is bolted” and “it can be unscrewed” are both incomplete.
Sources
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7IRS Publication 5653 — Cost Segregation Audit Techniques Guide (rev. 2-2025)(opens in a new tab)
Written for IRS examiners. The guide states it is not an official pronouncement of law and cannot be cited as authority. It predates the July 2025 law.