Ball v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. INCOME - APPORTIONMENT OF COST. - Held, that the evidence does not overcome the presumptive correctness of the Commissioner's determination that the total cost of common and preferred stock, purchased for a lump consideration, was allocable to the preferred stock alone. 2. GAIN OR LOSS. - Held, that an exchange of stock for stock as the result of a merger in 1915 constituted a reorganization within the meaning of section 203(h)(1)(A) of the 1926 Act, and was an exchange…
Read the full summary
1. INCOME - APPORTIONMENT OF COST. - Held, that the evidence does not overcome the presumptive correctness of the Commissioner's determination that the total cost of common and preferred stock, purchased for a lump consideration, was allocable to the preferred stock alone. 2. GAIN OR LOSS. - Held, that an exchange of stock for stock as the result of a merger in 1915 constituted a reorganization within the meaning of section 203(h)(1)(A) of the 1926 Act, and was an exchange such as described in section 203(b)(2), and that section 204(a)(6) is applicable for determining the basis for gain or…
1Opinion of the Court
*394OPINION.
Leech:
1. The first issue is whether in 1925 petitioner realized a profit of $18,000, his one-fifth share of the net proceeds of the sale of 10,000 shares of common stock of the City Ice Company of Kansas City, which had been purchased by a syndicate in 1922, together with 1,370 shares of preferred stock of that company, for a lump consideration of $100,000. Petitioner’s one-fifth interest in the syndicate’s stockholdings cost him $20,000 in 1922. None of the preferred stock was sold in 1925. In his determination of the disputed deficiency the Commissioner allocated the total cost of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Burnet v. HoustonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Wickwire v. ReineckeSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Mente v. EisnerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- Farnum v. WhitmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Lord & Hewlett v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Clark v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Anderson-Clayton Sec. Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1937
- Ball v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1932
- Hudson v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1939