Zilkha & Sons, Inc. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, certain corporate securities owned by the petitioners are stock, not debt, and accordingly, payments received by the petitioners on account of such securities are distributions with respect to stock and not interest.
1Opinion of the Court
OPHSTIOH
The sole issue to be decided in this case is whether the payments received by the petitioners are interest or distributions with respect to stock. The petitioners take the position that their investment in Charlottetown was in form and in substance an acquisition of stock so that the payments which they received were nontaxable distributions since Charlottetown had no earnings and profits in the years of the distributions. On the other hand, the respondent determined that the investment was in substance a loan so that the payments were taxable as interest.
Although the traditional…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Santa Anita Consol., Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1968
- United States v. South Georgia Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1939
- Ernst Kern Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1942
- Ambassador Apartments, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1968
- Ambassador Apartments, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Louis Litoff and Rose Litoff v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Motel Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- Republic Supply Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1976
- Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2012
- Joseph Lupowitz Sons, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1972
- Ragland Inv. Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.