Huffman v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
The reorganization of a business by dissolving a corporation and transferring its capital and surplus to a partnership the members of which have the same proportionate interest results in taxable income to the stockholder notwithstanding he in fact took nothing out of the business.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Steenhagen:
This was a business reorganization whereby the Fayetteville Milling Co., a corporation, became the Fayetteville Milling Co., a general partnership. Since all of the assets remained in the business and nothing was actually distributed, the taxpayer, a former stockholder and later partner, claims that he received no taxable income. To him it appears that his financial interest was precisely the same after the reorganization as before. But as a matter of law, this is not so. As a stockholder of the former corporation he was not directly an owner of its assets; as a member of *54th…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Eisner v. MacOmberSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- United States v. PhellisSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Lynch v. TurrishSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Cullinan v. Walker, Collector of Internal RevenueSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
3Cited by10 opinions
- Apt v. BirminghamDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1950
- Burge v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1926
- Crocker v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Darrow v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1927
- Edmond Weil, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1944
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.