Harrington v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
A taxpayer regularly employed on a salary, who made five purchases of securities during 1921 from brokers and one sale of securities at a loss which exceeded his income for 1921, is not entitled to a deduction in his return for 1922 on account thereof under the provisions of section 204 of the Revenue Act of 1921, such loss not resulting from the operation of a business regularly carried on by the taxpayer.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Trammell :
The question arising from the admitted facts is whether the taxpayer is entitled, under the provisions of section 204 of the Revenue Act of 1921, to a deduction in the year 1922 on account of a net loss sustained in 1921.
Section 204(a) of the Revenue Act of 1921 provides in part as follows:
Tbat as used in this section the term “ net loss ” means only net loss resulting from the operation of any trade or business regularly carried on by the taxpayer.
*12The question is whether the taxpayer was regularly engaged in the business of dealing in securities in 1921, it being conceded…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mente v. EisnerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- Woods v. LewellynDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1921
3Cited by7 opinions
- Atkins v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1936
- Anthony v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1930
- Elliott v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1929
- Goldberg v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928
- Harrington v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.