Merrill v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
In determining taxpayers' holding period for real estate for purposes of section 1231, I.R.C. 1954, consideration must be given not only to the dates on which bare legal title passes but also the dates on which the burdens and benefits of ownership are transferred in closed transactions. Holding period determined, under circumstances which involved acquisition and disposition of property under California escrow arrangements.
1Opinion of the Court
DreNNEN, Judge:
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioners’ income tax for the taxable year 1956 in the amount of $9,215.14.
The only issue remaining for decision is whether a joint venture to which petitioner Ted F. Merrill was a party held certain property for more than 6 months so that his profit from its sale is taxable as long-term gain under section 1231 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.1
FINDINGS OF FACT
Petitioners Ted F. Merrill and Elizabeth H. Merrill were at all times material hereto husband and wife and residents of Los Angeles, Calif. They filed a joint income tax return…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Brewster v. GageSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- United States v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Helvering v. San Joaquin Fruit & Investment Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- McFeely v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Union Pac. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1936
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by83 opinions
- Estate of Franklin v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1975
- Baird v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1977
- Derr v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1981
- Clodfelter v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1967
- Deyoe v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1976
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.