Fuhlage v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. In 1920 a corporation capitalized earned surplus and issued additional common stock. This was necessary in order to care for increased business and in order to provide for the contemplated entry into another phase of the same business. Thereafter, the business did not improve to the extent anticipated and the matter of business expansion was definitely abandoned in 1929. It was then determined that the company did not need all its capital for successful operation.
Read the full summary
1. In 1920 a corporation capitalized earned surplus and issued additional common stock. This was necessary in order to care for increased business and in order to provide for the contemplated entry into another phase of the same business. Thereafter, the business did not improve to the extent anticipated and the matter of business expansion was definitely abandoned in 1929. It was then determined that the company did not need all its capital for successful operation. The capitalization was reduced by the redemption of a portion of the capital stock. From 1923 to 1929 the corporation declared…
1Opinion of the Court
ALFRED E. FUHLAGE, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.
Fuhlage v. Commissioner
Docket No. 61754.
United States Board of Tax Appeals
32 B.T.A. 222; 1935 BTA LEXIS 980;
March 12, 1935, Promulgated
1. In 1920 a corporation capitalized earned surplus and issued additional common stock. This was necessary in order to care for increased business and in order to provide for the contemplated entry into another phase of the same business. Thereafter, the business did not improve to the extent anticipated and the matter of business expansion was definitely abandoned in 1929. It was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fuhlage v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1935