Arnes v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
H and W were married and jointly owned 100 percent of M, which owned and operated a McDonald's restaurant. H and W separated. Subsequently, H and W surrendered their jointly held M shares in exchange for separate certificates reflecting equal ownership.
Read the full summary
H and W were married and jointly owned 100 percent of M, which owned and operated a McDonald's restaurant. H and W separated. Subsequently, H and W surrendered their jointly held M shares in exchange for separate certificates reflecting equal ownership. H, W, and McDonald's agreed that M would redeem W's stock, and that H would guarantee M's obligation to pay W. The agreement was part of the property settlement agreement of H and W, which was subsequently incorporated in their divorce decree. W claimed and sued in the District Court for a tax refund on the grounds that gain from the…
1ConcurrenceBeghe, J.
Having joined the majority opinion, I write separately to extend my comments in Blatt v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 77, 86 (1994) (Beghe, J., concurring), on the benefits of consolidation, and to address the dissents.
1. Respondent’s Role as Stakeholder
Of course, it’s proper to select a test case and let it go forward because it will be instructive or dispositive as to the identical or similar case or cases that are postponed pending its outcome. But when, as in this case, the parties to a transaction have opposing tax interests, respondent has the institutional obligation, subject to the Court’s…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Jack E. Golsen and Sylvia H. Golsen v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1971
- Moline Properties, Inc. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- United States v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Wall v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
- Marr v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.