Kemon v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
The partnership of which petitioners were members was a trader as to securities held by it for more than 6 months. Such securities were not held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of trade or business. The gain on their sale or exchange is taxable at capital gains rates pursuant to section 117 (b) of the Internal Revenue Code.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Arundell, Judge:
The respondent has determined that securities disposed of by Lilley & Co. during the years in question were not capital assets within the definition of section 117 (a) (1) of the Internal Revenue Code and, therefore, the gain upon their sale or exchange is taxable as ordinary income pursuant to section 22 of the Code. The relevant portion of section 117 (a) (1) defines “capital assets” as “property held by the taxpayer (whether or not connected with his trade or business), but does not include * * * property held by the taxpayer primarily for sale to customers in the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Stern Bros. & Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1951
- Schafer v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Wood v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1951
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. BurnettCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1941
- Van Suetendael v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUECourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- United States v. Steven M. WoodCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Stephen Marrin and Jane Marrin v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Williamson v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1953
- Carmel v. United States (In Re Carmel)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 1991
- Heggestad v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1988
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.