Pierce v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
1. Entire amount of installments received by beneficiary under life insurance contract pursuant to an option exercised by her following insured's death held exempt from income tax under section 22 (b) (1), I. R. C. Section 19.22 (b) (1)-1(c) of Regulations 103, as amended, is invalid. 2. Amounts received by such beneficiary as dividends held not exempt.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Van Fossan, Judge'.
The only issue presented is whether the respondent erred in including the sum of $2,009.51 in the petitioner’s gross income for 1940. The respondent’s action is predicated on Treasury Regulations 103, section 19.22 (b) (1)-1, as amended.1 That section of the Treasury regulations interprets section 22 (b) (1), I. R. C.2 The legislative history of that section of the Code is fully and concisely set forth in Sidney W. Winslow, Jr., 39 B. T. A. 373, and need not be restated.
The rule is well established that section 22 (b) (1), I. R. C., exempts from taxation…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Thornley v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1943
- Latterman v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
3Cited by16 opinions
- Jones v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1943
- Jones v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1954
- Hall v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1949
- Law v. RothensiesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1944
- Bullard v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1945
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.