Thomas v. Commissioner (A)
United States Tax Court
Petitioner, who had knowledge of and experience in prospecting phosphate-bearing land and who at the time was conducting such prospecting for landowners, and one Holland, who owned a parcel of such land, planned and entered upon a venture of assembling phosphate acreage of such size, location, and phosphate content as to be of interest to a phosphate-mining company.
Read the full summary
Petitioner, who had knowledge of and experience in prospecting phosphate-bearing land and who at the time was conducting such prospecting for landowners, and one Holland, who owned a parcel of such land, planned and entered upon a venture of assembling phosphate acreage of such size, location, and phosphate content as to be of interest to a phosphate-mining company. They at all times intended to sell the assembled acreage and at no time intended to mine phosphate or have it mined on a royalty basis. Over a period of more than 2 years, they prospected lands for phosphate, arranged for…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Turner, Judge:
The primary question is whether or not petitioner’s interests in the lands comprising the Homeland Assembly were property held by him “primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of his trade or business,” under the provisions of section 117 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939.5 If they were not so held, the gains realized by him on their sale in the taxable year were properly reported as long-term capital gain, and the respondent was in error in determining otherwise.
On the evidence of record, we have set out in our Findings of Fact a fairly detailed…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stockton Harbor Industrial Company v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1954
- Warner Mountains Lumber Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
3Cited by1 opinion
- Thomas v. Commissioner (A)United States Tax Court · 1957