Moisseiff v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. The Delaware River Bridge Joint Commission is a governmental instrumentality of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and The Port of New York Authority is a governmental instrumentality of New York and New Jersey. 2. The petitioner was an employee of these governmental instrumentalities mentioned in the years 1925, 1926, and 1927, and the compensation received by him for services performed is exempt from income tax.
1Opinion of the Court
*522OPINION.
Smith:
The question presented by these proceedings is whether the petitioner is liable to income tax upon compensation paid to him *523in 1925, 1926, and 1927 by the Delaware River Bridge Joint Commission and The Port Authority. The petitioner claims that these commissions were instrumentalities of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York; that he was an employee of those instrumentalities; and, accordingly, that the compensation is exempt under article 88 of Regulations 69, issued under the Revenue Act of 1926, which provides in part:
Compensation paid to its officers and employees by a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Metcalf & Eddy v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- County of Mobile v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Houck v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Singer Manufacturing Co. v. RahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Railroad Company v. HanningSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Murray v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Harlan v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- FITZERALD v. COMMISSIONERUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Modjeski v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Carey v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.