Benson v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Interest paid on a note, executed as a gift, held not to be deductible.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Arundell:
The petitioner is willing to have us decide the issue upon his admission that no legal consideration was paid for the note and that it was intended as a gift.
The courts have held that a promissory note given ’ without a valuable consideration is a mere promise to make a gift in the future. Williams v. Forbes, 114 Ill. 167; 28 N. E. 463; Wisler v. *280Tomb, 169 Cal. 382; 146 Pac. 876. The promise to pay interest was made concurrently with the promise to pay the principal sum and is nothing more than a promise to make a future gift.
The taxpayer fulfilled his promises, in part,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Williams v. ForbesIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
- Roelofson v. HatchMichigan Supreme Court · 1854
- Wisler v. TombCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Van Winkle v. KetchamNew York Supreme Court · 1805
3Cited by9 opinions
- Linder v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1977
- Woodward v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1952
- Couchman v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Benson v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1927
- Couchman v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.