Maybe, says Judge Travis A. (“Tag”) Greaves, but even though Amgen Inc. & Subsidiaries, Docket No. 16017-21, filed 8/1/23, filed a motion to calendar, requesting Judge Tag Greaves to visit their manufacturing site on the Isla del Encanto, he must decline.

IRS says the trip will give a distorted view of the importance of the Puerto Rican site and its operation, because Amgen & Subsidiaries site their drug operations in various locales, and have adopted the profit split method for allocating income and deductions amongst the lot. So this is a Section 482 reallocation case, and the issue is who does what, where, and when, to keep Amgen & Subsidiaries from allocating the cherries to the low-tax places and the pits to the high-tax.

The only specific Rule is Rule 72(a) which allows one party to enter another’s land for discovery. True, Tax Court Judges have done site visits in the past. The USDCDPR checklist is “(i) the importance of the evidence to be obtained; (ii) whether a view will substantially aid the Court in reaching a correct verdict; (iii) whether the Court could visualize the scene from other types of evidence apart from a site visit; and (iv) whether site visits would be practical or logistically difficult.” Order, at p. 3. (Citations omitted).

“A profit split analysis requires the relative evaluation of the economic activities of all the parties to an economic venture. Respondent maintains that an AML [Puerto Rico] site visit (without visiting other relevant sites) would prejudicially emphasize the functions and resources employed by one controlled entity, while ignoring those of Amgen’s U.S controlled entities. We agree. Without the benefit of visiting the other relevant sites, the Court could not put AML’s operations in proper perspective in determining comparability with the other sites.” Order, at p. 3.

I note in passing that these are all U.S. operations, as Puerto Rico is United States territory.

Judge Tag Greaves will have to get his impressions of the other sites from “standard presentation methods such as videos, photographs, expert reports, testimony, or documentary evidence.” Order, at p. 4. No reason the same from the PR site could not serve as well.

And Judge Tag Graves is not pulling a Willie Nelson any time soon. “Finally, we recognize the possibility that the Court may benefit from visiting AML as well as several of Amgen’s numerous facilities throughout the U.S. The logistics, time commitment, and impracticality of crisscrossing the U.S. to do so, however, would be prohibitive.” Order, at p. 4.

I do give the trusty attorneys for Amgen & Subsidiaries a Taishoff “Good Try,” although which of the fifteen (count ’em, fifteen) attorneys listed for petitioner on the docket search came up with the idea, I do not know. Your colleagues should buy you a Bacardi 8 Años piña colada.