Peters v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
*978OPINION.
Goodrich:
It may be fairly inferred from the records that petitioner, perhaps because discouraged concerning the prospects of profitable continuance of Mason, Inc., decided to liquidate his investment in a stock which had depreciated in value in order that he might, by application of the loss thus sustained, reduce his income, and consequently his tax thereon. But, if incurred in a bona fide transaction, a loss is not to be disallowed merely because it was deliberately sustained as a means of reducing tax liability. United States v. Isham, 84 U.S. 496; Bullen v. Wisconsin, 240 U.S.…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- United States v. IshamSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Bullen v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Atkins v. AtkinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Talbot v. TalbotSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1911
- Woodard v. WoodardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Rand Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Dennett v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Wells v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Dennett v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Peters v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.