
    ANDERSON, CLAYTON & CO. v. THE UNITED STATES
    No. 232-55.
    Decided December 3, 1958
    
      
      Mr. John O. White for the plaintiff. Messrs. Fulhright, OrooTcer, Freeman, Bates da White were on the briefs.
    
      Mr. John A. Bees, with whom was Mr. Assistant Attorney General Charles K. Bice, for the defendant. Mr. James P. Garland was on the brief.
   Laramore, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a suit for the refund of income taxes. The claim is predicated on the disallowance by the Commissioner of Internal Eevenue of a deduction in the amount of $413,463.19 for the year 1950.

Plaintiff is a domestic corporation with its principal offices in Houston, Texas. During the fiscal year ending July 31, 1950, and for many years prior thereto, plaintiff was engaged in the business of merchandising cotton in the United States and abroad, including Egypt. Its books and records are kept on a fiscal year basis and its Federal tax returns have been filed on the accrual basis for fiscal years ending on July 31.

Some time in 1930, plaintiff established a branch office at Alexandria, Egypt. The profits of the Alexandria branch were determined by adjusting the current accounts on the branch office books to their dollar value at the close of each fiscal year. The amounts in dollar value were then carried over to the home office account and reported as income for Federal tax purposes. This system of accounting by the plaintiff came under attack by the Internal Eevenue Service and was the subject of a petition filed in the United States Tax Court covering the years 1933 and 1934. While the petition was under submission, a settlement was reached between the plaintiff and the Commissioner and resulted in an agreement which contained the following:

The income of the Havre Branch and other autonomous foreign offices keeping their accounts in a foreign currency is to be determined by the difference in dollar net worth at the beginning and end of the year adjusted for any profits transferred from such branch during the year. In calculating the dollar net worth the current dollar rate of the foreign currency involved is used in the case of all current assets and all liabilities, and _ the dollar value of fixed assets is determined by the original foreign currency cost converted to dollars at the rates in effect when the investment was made. All inter-office transfers of funds are also included at the rates actually used. It is understood that inter-office accounts payable and receivable are treated as outside accounts on the books of the branches and the head office and that such inter-office balances are to be valued at current rates of exchange to obtain the correct net worth of the branch. In general, this method is intended to embody the principles set out in the case of Frederick Victor & Acheles v. Salt's Textile Mfg. Co., 26 F. (2d) 249, and to take into income the fluctuations in net worth resulting from changes in dollar values of liabilities and current assets carried in foreign currencies. It is the intention to avoid inclusion m income of any change in the dollar value of fixed assets and investments as a result of fluctuation of exchange rates unless and until such assets are sold or disposed of.
In consideration of the foregoing, the taxpayer agrees that in subsequent years it will compute its income in accordance with these principles, that any claim for refund on such issue heretofore or hereafter filed, may be adjusted on such basis and any claim heretofore filed, including that for the year 1938, is waived to the extent such claim conflicts with the basis agreed upon; provided, however, this undertaking shall not be applicable or binding upon either party in the event of changes in the law subsequent to the date hereof requiring a different treatment.

Pursuant to the above agreement, plaintiff thereafter consistently reflected gains and losses from its exchange fluctuations on accounts payable to or receivable from its foreign subsidiaries and unrelated concerns as well as from its foreign branches. Included in the accounts of the Alexandria branch was the account of the Nile Ginning Company in which the plaintiff owned 97.2 percent of the stock. The current Egyptian pound account of the Nile Ginning Company on the books of the branch, and also of the parent company, was treated in the same manner as all other foreign currency balances. They were valued in dollars at the current rate of exchange and the difference between such value and the value previously recorded on the books was carried into an “optional account” as a gain or as a loss in exchange. These accounts were apparently adjusted twice a year and the so-called profit and loss was reflected in plaintiff’s tax return filed at the end of its fiscal year.

On September 28, 1939, after the outbreak of World War II, the Government in Egypt clamped controls on the transfer of Egyptian pounds into United States dollars. This effectively prohibited plaintiff from remitting any profits it might receive at its Egyptian branch to its home office. However, the Egyptian Exchange Control did allow one remittance from the Alexandria branch to the home office of 50,000 Egyptian pounds between September 28, 1939 and January 31,1949.

As of July 31, 1945, plaintiff had net unremitted earnings (after Egyptian taxes) of 128,119.471 Egyptian pounds all of which had been reported as United States income at the rate of $4.13 per pound. From July 31, 1945 until the time the branch office was liquidated, plaintiff continued to take into its United States income for tax purposes the United States dollar value of its branch office profits. The exact amounts of the earnings separated by years and showing foreign taxes paid are set forth in the findings.

On January 31, 1949, the Alexandria branch office was liquidated and the Nile Ginning Company took over all of the branch’s assets and liabilities (findings 13 and 15). On July 31,1949, plaintiff had on its books in Houston a current account receivable of 250,665.745 Egyptian pounds, representing blocked funds valued at the then rate of $4.13 per pound. Certain minor additions and reductions for interest accruals and miscellaneous items were made to the account receivable with the result that at July 31,1950, such account amounted to 260,552.220 pounds.

In September 1949 Britain devalued the pound sterling which resulted in a corresponding reduction of the Egyptian pound so that on July 31, 1950, the Egyptian pound was worth $2.50. The resulting decrease in the plaintiff’s blocked Egyptian earnings amounted to $413,463.19 for which plaintiff claimed a loss deduction on its fiscal 1950 income tax return. The Commissioner denied plaintiff’s claimed deduction on the ground that the Egyptian account represented Egyptian income deferred under Mimeograph 6475. Mimeograph 6475 (CB 1950-1, p. 50) provides in pertinent part as follows:

1. Numerous inquiries have been received by the Bureau relative to the proper treatment for Federal income tax purposes of income, either in currency or in other property, arising in countries having monetary or exchange restrictions. The existence of these restrictions often makes it difficult for taxpayers to ascertain the value, in terms of United States dollars, of the blocked income arising in countries having such restrictions.
2. For the purposes of this mimeograph, the term “deferable income” is used to describe income received by, credited to the account of, or accrued to a taxpayer which, owing to monetary exchange or other restrictions imposed by a foreign country, is not readily convertible into United States dollars or into other money or property which is readily convertible into United States dollars. However, income ceases to be “deferable income” when, to the extent thereof, (a) money or property in such foreign country is readily convertible into United States dollars or into other money or property which is readily convertible into United States dollars; (b) notwithstanding the existence of any laws or regulations forbidding the exchange of money or property into United States dollars, conversion is actually made into United States dollars or other money or property which is readily convertible into United States dollars; or (c) such income is used for nondeductible personal expenses, is disposed of by way of gift, bequest, devise, or inheritance or by dividend or other distribution, or, in the case of a resident alien, a taxpayer terminates his residence in the United States.
3. A taxpayer, whether individual, corporate, or other, may elect to use a method of accounting (sections 41-43, Internal Bevenue Code) in which the reporting of “deferable income” as taxable income is deferred until the income ceases to be “deferable income,” at which time it is includible in gross income.
4. A taxpayer who elects to use this method of accounting shall file with his Federal income tax return a return headed “Beport of Deferable Foreign Income, pursuant to Mimeograph No. 6475,” using for this purpose a separate income tax form of the same type as that with which it is filed. In such return, the taxpayer shall declare that the “deferable income” will be in-eluded in taxable income for the year in wbicb sucli income, to the extent thereof, ceases to be “deferable income.” In such return, the taxpayer shall also declare that he waives any right to claim that the “deferable income” or any part thereof, was includible in his gross income for any earlier year.
8. Where the taxpayer adopts the method of accounting provided for by this mimeograph, losses shall also be taken into account under the rules for deferment stated herein.
9. The provisions of this mimeograph will be applicable to all open taxable years. The taxpayer shall designate the first open taxable year for which the method of accounting provided herein shall be used. If such first taxable year is a prior taxable year, the report (prescribed in paragraph number 4, above) for such year and for each of the intervening taxable years in order shall be filed with the taxpayer’s income tax return when the election is made as provided in such paragraph 4.
10. A taxpayer who adopts such method of accounting shall before making any change or variation therein, secure the consent of the Commissioner.

Under the terms of the Mimeograph plaintiff filed deferred income tax returns for fiscal years 1946-1949. Plaintiff claimed and was allowed a refund of all United States income taxes paid on the blocked funds for-the years 1946-1949.

It is the position of the plaintiff that under the collateral agreement entered into it is entitled, notwithstanding a deferral of taxes under Mimeograph 6475, to include the exchange fluctuations of its Egyptian account in determining its 1950 taxable income.

After filing of suit in this, court the Government has conceded that with respect to 47,487.426 Egyptian pounds in. the Egyptian account plaintiff is entitled to a loss deduction of $77,404.50 in 1950. The 47,487.426 pounds represent earnings for years prior to 1946 which were included in United States income at the exchange rate of $4.13 per pound and upon which United States taxes have been paid. As to the pounds remaining in the account upon which Federal taxes were once paid but refunded, the Government refuses to acknowledge a loss deduction because it maintains any loss sustained is attributable to the income which has been deferred and is therefore not susceptible to a loss deduction.

It is true that under plaintiff’s method of accounting as set out in the collateral agreement, it would be entitled to include as a loss deduction the diminution of the dollar value pf its Egyptian pound account in the year 1950. However, when plaintiff elected to come under the terms of the mimeograph which permitted the deferral of blocked income, it, to that extent, abandoned its former method of accounting and is now bound by the terms of the mimeograph.

The effect of an election under the mimeograph is to waive the right to claim that the income was reportable for any year other than the year in which it became unblocked. It follows that to the extent that plaintiff’s Egyption account represents earning for the years 1946-1949, it has never been reported as income for Federal tax purposes and will not become income until such time as it becomes unblocked.

The general rule as to deductibility is that there can be no loss for tax purposes on amounts which have never been reported as income. Warner Bros. Co. v. United States, 214 F. 2d 429, 431; Tiscornia v. Commissioner, 95 F. 2d 678, 683. Inasmuch as the claimed 1946-1949 loss is based upon amounts unreported as income, no deduction can be allowed in the year 1950. Plaintiff, however, is entitled to deduct $77,404.50, representing the loss claimed on the pre-1946 tax paid Egyptian accounts, and is entitled to judgment in the amount of $29,851.92 representing the overpayment.

Judgment will be entered for plaintiff in the amount of $29,851.92, with interest thereon as provided by law.

It is so ordered.

Madden, Judge/ Whitaker, Judge; and Jones, Chief Judge, concur.

FINDINGS OE FACT

The court, having considered the evidence, the report of Trial Commissioner Eichard H. Akers, and the briefs and argument of counsel, makes findings of fact as follows:

1. The plaintiff is a Delaware corporation which was organized on December 31,1929, and which has its principal office in Houston, Texas. During its fiscal year ending July 31,1950, and for many years prior thereto, the plaintiff was engaged in the merchandizing of cotton in the United States and within various foreign countries, including Egypt. Its books are kept and its Federal tax returns have been filed upon the accrual basis for fiscal years ending July 31.

2. From the time a branch office was established at Alexandria, Egypt, in 1930, the profits of the Alexandria branch and other foreign branches were determined by adjusting all current accounts on the books to their dollar value at the end of each fiscal year. As will appear from findings 3, 4, and 5, in 1942, in connection with a proceeding before the Tax Court, the plaintiff agreed that in subsequent years it would continue to use this same method of determining income and it has been its consistent accounting practice to adjust all of its foreign currency accounts to current value in dollars at the end of each fiscal year.

3. While appeals by the plaintiff for the years 1933 and 1934 were pending before the Tax Court, the Southwestern Appellate Division of the office of the Commissioner of Internal Eevenue gave consideration during 1939 and 1940 to the various issues presented therein, one of which was the proper method of accounting with the two foreign branches, one at Le Havre, France, and the other at Alexandria, Egypt. The Commissioner detailed a Mr. Edelschein of the Practice and Procedure Division to advise the Southwestern Appellate Division on the matter of foreign branch accounting. Mr. Edelschein, after an examination of the plaintiff’s books, found that the plaintiff was properly accounting for fluctuations in foreign exchange through the use of an “option account” concerning which he stated:

Under the accounting method employed by the taxpayer exchange gains or losses whether arising through daily transactions or arising through revaluation of current assets and liabilities are debited or credited, as the case may be, into an account designated as “options.” Thus a revaluation of current assets and current liabilities at rates of exchange at the end of the year, will result in debite or credits in the “option” account. Gains or losses arising through hedging transactions are likewise included in such account whose net balance as at the end of the year is then included as an item of gain or loss in the determination of the net income of the branch.
In the case of the Alexandria branch, examination of the taxpayer’s records shows that by reason of changes in exchange yalues readjustment of the debits and credits shown in ledger accounts was effected as at the end of the year, the resultant increases or decreases constituting debits or credits to the “option account” before the latter was closed into profit and loss as at the end of the year, thus accounting for increases or decreases in net worth through changes in exchange values.

4. The issue before the Tax Court in the years 1933 and 1934, which concerned foreign branch accounting, was only one of the many issues involved, and in the agreed settlement of the case before the Tax Court, a separate collateral agreement was taken concerning the issue with respect to foreign branch accounting, which agreement read in part as follows:

The income of the Havre Branch and other autonomous foreign offices keeping their accounts in a foreign currency is to be determined by the difference in dollar net worth at the beginning and end of the year adjusted for any profits transferred from such branch during the year. In calculating the dollar net worth the current dollar rate of the foreign currency involved is used in the case of all current assets and all liabilities, and the dollar value of fixed assets is determined by the original foreign currency cost converted to dollars at the rates in effect when the investment was made. All inter-office transfers of funds are also included at the rates actually used. It is understood that inter-office accounts payable and receivable are treated as outside accounts on the books of the branches and the head office and that such inter-office balances are to be valued at current rates of exchange to obtain the correct net worth of the branch. In general, this method is intended to embody the principles set out in the case of Fredericks Victor & Acholes v. Salt's Textile Mfg. Co., 26 F. (2d) 249, and to take into income the fluctuations in net worth resulting from changes in dollar values of liabilities and current assets carried in foreign currencies. It is the intention to avoid inclusion in income of any change in the dollar value of fixed assets and investments as a result of fluctuation of exchange rates unless and until such assets are sold or disposed of.
In consideration of the foregoing, the taxpayer agrees that in subsequent years it will compute its income in accordance with these principles, that any claim for refund on such issue heretofore or hereafter filed, may be adjusted on such basis and any claim heretofore filed, including that for the year 1938, is waived to the extent such claim conflicts with the basis agreed upon; provided, however, this undertaking shall not be applicable or binding upon either party in the event of changes in the law subsequent to the date hereof requiring a different treatment.

5. Pursuant to the agreement mentioned in the preceding finding, the plaintiff thereafter consistently reflected gains and losses from its exchange fluctuations on accounts payable to or receivable from its foreign subsidiaries and unrelated concerns as well as from its foreign branches. The current Egyptian pound account of the Nile Ginning Company on the books of the branch and also of the parent company were treated in the same manner as all other foreign currency balances. They were valued in dollars at the current rate of exchange and the difference between such value and the value previously recorded in the books was carried into the “option account” as a gain or as a loss in exchange.

6. Under the general system of accounting used by the plaintiff and in accordance with the Internal Eevenue Service ruling S. M. 5693, V-2, Cumulative Bulletin 20, its inventory of cotton is valued at market and any gain or loss upon all open transactions, that is, forward purchases and sales, is accrued. Under that system, the difference between the sales contract price of cotton sold forward to a mill and the market value of such cotton on July 31 is taken into income as a gain if the market has declined, or as a loss if the cotton market is higher.

7. Likewise, under the system of accounting used by the plaintiff, in the case of an open sale to a French mill for payment in French francs or to a British mill in pounds sterling, loss or gain arises not only from a change in the market value of the cotton but also from any change in the market value of the foreign currency. The risk of the change in the foreign currency value may be offset by a forward sale of francs or sterling and the accrued loss or gain on the currency contract is likewise taken into income in dollars on July 31. Unless the accrued loss or gam on the open currency contract is taken into income at the same time as that on the open forward sale of the cotton, the gain or loss from the total transaction is not accurately reflected. Such forward currency contracts are used by the plaintiff to hedge against the risk of exchange loss involved in the forward sale of the cotton for the payment of foreign currency.

Deposits of foreign currency with banks in Britain, France, and other foreign countries are also adjusted by plaintiff to their value in dollars on July 31, and the amount of any adjustment is taken into consideration in arriving at income at that time.

8. For many years the plaintiff had conducted its merchandizing transactions in Egypt through its foreign branch located at Alexandria, and it also owned 97.2 percent of the stock of a foreign subsidiary known as Nile Ginning Company, which was engaged in ginning, cottonseed crushing, and cottonseed oil refining. As was the plaintiff’s custom, this subsidiary had originaly been capitalized at approximately the cost of its fixed assets and advances of working capital were made when needed either directly by the plaintiff or by the foreign branch at Alexandria from its surplus funds or from funds it borrowed from Egyptian banks. After the onset of World War II, dollars became very scarce in Egypt and the Egyptian government established a priority list for the use thereof. Since the transmission of Egyptian earnings to- a foreign parent was of very low priority, such ordinary commercial exchange transactions were, in effect, blocked. As a result, after the institution of these governmental exchange restrictions in Egypt on September 28,1939, the plaintiff reported the earnings of its foreign branch in Egypt but thereafter was able to receive only one remittance prior to the liquidation of the branch on January 31,1949, namely, 50,000 Egyptian pounds on August 25, 1948, as shown in finding 11.

9. As just mentioned above, governmental exchange restrictions had been in effect in Egypt since September 28, 1939. Transfers of United States dollars or other hard currency for any purpose other than the importation of goods had been subject to the prior approval of the Central Exchange Control in Cairo. Until the end of the fiscal year ending July 31,1939, profits could be remitted from Egypt but from September 28,1939, the date of the restrictions just referred to, the plaintiff was refused permission to remit profits by the Egyptian Exchange Control on the ground that the Egyptian treasury did not have sufficient dollars to authorize such remittances.

10. Net unremitted earnings (after Egyptian taxes) of the plaintiff’s branch in Alexandria, Egypt, to July 31,1945, aggregated 128,119.471 Egyptian pounds, all of which had been taken into United States income at the rate of $4.13 per pound for a total of $529,133.42.

11. The branch income before Egyptian taxes for the year 1946 and the subsequent years until the liquidation of the branch on January 31, 1949, as shown below, was originally reported by the plaintiff in the same manner as in previous years, but after the issuance of the Internal Revenue Service Mimeograph 6475, deferred income tax returns were filed for these years showing Egyptian pounds as follows:

Year ended Egyptian pounds

July 31, 1946_ 39,356.301

July 31, 1947_ 76, 731. 536

July 31, 1948_ 227, 542.541

July 31, 1949_ 36,097.25

Total_ 379,727.628

On August 21,1948, the Egyptian Control authorized the transfer of 50,000 Egyptian pounds to the United States and such transfer was effected on August 25,1948, as shown in finding 8, at $4.1266 to the pound. That transfer reduced the deferred income just referred to to 329,727.628 pounds. A foreign tax credit for Egyptian tax paid in the amount of 7,830.202 Egyptian pounds was taken and allowed on account of that transfer.

12.The taxes paid the Egyptian government for the years specified below were as follows:

Year ended Egyptian, pounds

July 31, 1947_ 10, 681.480

July 31,1948_ 102, 473.365

July 31, 1949_ 7,193.678

Total 120,348. 523

Credit for these taxes was deferred as required by Mimeograph 6475.

13. On January 31,1949, the foreign branch in Egypt was liquidated except to the extent referred to in finding 14, with the Egyptian subsidiary, Nile Ginning Company, taking over the following assets and liabilities at book value:

Assets Egyptian pounds

Cash _,_ 908. 830

Government securities_ 886.155

Accounts receivable_ 181,189.432

Inventories_ 1, 603, 998.122

Fixed Assets — less depr. reserve_ 669.009

Total_ 1,787, 651. 548

Liabilities

Notes payable_ 504, 069. 618

Accounts payable_ 891, 349.244

Accrued income taxes_ 67, 012. 707

Accrued expenses_ 134, 729.292

Deferred liabilities_ 184, 809.398

Capital surplus contribution_ 7, 498. 576

Total_ 1, 789, 468. 835

Net liabilities assumed by Nile_ 1, 817.287

14. At the time of the liquidation referred to above, the Nile Ginning Company owed the Egyptian branch 252,483.032 pounds for working capital advances in addition to the above items transferred by the branch. Since the branch, in effect, retained that account receivable in the liquidation, the subsidiary’s assumption of the net liabilities of 1,817.287 pounds reduced the principal sum of the amount owing by the Nile Ginning Company to the branch to 250,665.745 pounds. After the transfer of assets and liabilities to the subsidiary by the branch, as shown in finding 13, the books of the branch reflected unremitted earnings in the total amount of 337,498.576 pounds, which were represented by the following items:

Assets Egyptian Pounds

Due from Nile Ginning Company_ 250, 665.745

Due from bead office_ 79, 334.255

Capital surplus contribution to Nile Ginning Company_ 7,498. 576

Total_ 337,498.576

Certain minor additions and reductions for interest accruals and miscellaneous items were made to the account receivable of 250,685.745 pounds referred to above, with the result that at July 31, 1950, such account amounted to 260,552.220 pounds.

15. The exchange adjustment to the account receivable of 250,665.745 pounds referred to in the preceding finding was handled in the plaintiff’s records in the Houston office through the “options” account. Each six months the plaintiff inventoried all current assets and liabilities of its branches and accounts due from subsidiaries at their current exchange values in this option account. In this manner, this account receivable was adjusted in the options account for its exchange value as of January 31,1949, July 31, 1949, January 31, 1950, and July 31, 1950, the differences in values being entered in the profit and loss account. There was no appreciable change in the exchange rate between the entry date of J anuary 31, 1949, and the close of the fiscal year at J uly 31, 1949. However, in September 1949, Britain devalued the pound sterling and the Egyptian pound immediately declined a like amount in value. The exchange rate of the Egyptian pound expressed in United States dollars at $4.13 on July 31, 1949, declined to $3.1125 on September 19, 1949, to $2,871 on January 31, 1950, and to $2.50 as of July 31, 1950. The first break from $4.13 to $3.1125 occasioned a decrease in value of the existing balance of the Nile account receivable amounting to $257,889.74 in United States currency. The further decline to $2.50 created an additional decrease in value that amounted to $155,573.45 when inventoried at the dates of January 31, 1950, and July 31, 1950, making a total decrease of $413,463.19.

16. The plaintiff filed its Federal corporate income tax return for the fiscal year ended July 31, 1950, in which it took as deduction the total exchange decrease in value of $413,463.19 referred to in finding 15 and paid as income tax due the sum of $3,732,728.70.

17. On or about September 22, 1953, the plaintiff filed a claim for refund in the amount of $131,501.96 for the fiscal year ended July 31,1950 based upon the transfer by the Commissioner of certain technical service income to an earlier year and a Brazilian remittance tax not previously deducted. After an examination by a revenue agent, the Commissioner allowed the deductions set out in that claim but disallowed the Egyptian exchange loss of $413,463.19 deducted by the plaintiff in its original return and found an overpayment of $3,811.81.

On or about November 10, 1953, the plaintiff filed a further claim for refund in the amount of $163,266.01 on the basis of certain adjustments made by the revenue agent and the offsetting disallowance of the Egyptian exchange loss. Thereafter, the Commissioner allowed a net refund in the amount of $3,811.81 and by registered letter dated December 21, 1954, gave notice of the official rejection of such claim to the extent not so allowed, which included the disallowance of the deduction claimed for the foreign exchange loss of $413,463.19.

18. In taking the action referred to in the previous finding, the Internal Revenue Service accepted the plaintiff’s consistent general practice of valuing all foreign currency accounts including those with its subsidiaries, but disallowed the claimed Egyptian exchange loss in the amount of $413,463.19 on the belief that it represented Egyptian income which had not been reported and therefore had a zero basis. The parties agree that, in accordance with the agreement mentioned in finding 4 and the plaintiff’s consistent accounting practice, the plaintiff was required to revalue on January 31 and July 31, 1950, its accounts receivable of 250,665.745 and 260,552.220 Egyptian pounds due from the Nile Ginning Company.

19. The defendant now concedes that the plaintiff is entitled to deduct the $1.63 ($4.13-$2.50) decline in dollar value insofar as the Nile Ginning Company current account represented unremitted earnings on which the plaintiff has paid United States income tax, namely, the 128,119.471 Egyptian pounds earned prior to August 1, 1945, less the 79,334.255 pound head office account and minor adjustments amounting to 1,297.790 pounds, leaving unremitted tax-paid earnings of 47,487.426 pounds. Such' decline in value amounts to $77,404.50.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

Upon the foregoing findings of fact, which are made a part of the judgment herein, the court concludes as a matter of law that the plaintiff is entitled to recover, and it is therefore adjudged and ordered that it recover of and from the United States twenty-nine thousand eight hundred fifty-one dollars and ninety-two cents ($29,851.92), with interest as provided by law. 
      
       Apparently these were the only years open.
     
      
       This Is the 128,119.47 pound pre-August 1, 1945, Egyptian account of the Alexandria branch, less adjustments totaling 80,632.045 pounds (finding 19).
     