Legal Opinion

J. M. & M. S. Browning Co. v. Commissioner

United States Board of Tax Appeals

Decided April 19, 1927No. Docket No. 1037Published

1. License agreements for the use of patents are intangible property. The right to receive royalties thereunder is likewise intangible property and when paid into a corporation for a nominal consideration can not be included in invested capital under section 326(a)(3) of the Revenue Act of 1918. 2. The fair market value as of January 2, 1915, of right to receive royalties under certain license agreements, and the manner of computing the deduction for the exhaustion thereof,…

Read the full summary

1. License agreements for the use of patents are intangible property. The right to receive royalties thereunder is likewise intangible property and when paid into a corporation for a nominal consideration can not be included in invested capital under section 326(a)(3) of the Revenue Act of 1918. 2. The fair market value as of January 2, 1915, of right to receive royalties under certain license agreements, and the manner of computing the deduction for the exhaustion thereof, determined. 3. The petitioner accepted a lump sum in lieu of the royalties which would be payable under contracts owned…

1Opinion of the Court

APPEAL OF J.M. AND M. S. BROWNING CO.

J. M. & M. S. Browning Co. v. Commissioner

Docket No. 1037.

United States Board of Tax Appeals

6 B.T.A. 914; 1927 BTA LEXIS 3379;

April 19, 1927, Promulgated

1. License agreements for the use of patents are intangible property. The right to receive royalties thereunder is likewise intangible property and when paid into a corporation for a nominal consideration can not be included in invested capital under section 326(a)(3) of the Revenue Act of 1918.

2. The fair market value as of January 2, 1915, of right to receive royalties under certain license agreements,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Herald-Despatch Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1926
  2. Dwight & Lloyd Sintering Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1924
  3. Shope Brick Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1927
  4. Appeal of J. M.United States Board of Tax Appeals · 1927

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API