Legal Opinion

Hoyt v. Commissioner

United States Board of Tax Appeals

Decided September 29, 1936No. Docket Nos. 62905, 64691, 64710-64712, 70951-70954Published

1. The discovery value of a mine in excess of cost represents unrealized appreciation in the value of property and should not be included in the computation of the earnings and profits of a corporation available for distribution as taxable dividends. 2. Gross receipts of a mine, in excess of cost, set aside by a corporation in a depletion reserve based on discovery value, repsent realized appreciation in the value of property and are profits of the corporation.

Read the full summary

1. The discovery value of a mine in excess of cost represents unrealized appreciation in the value of property and should not be included in the computation of the earnings and profits of a corporation available for distribution as taxable dividends. 2. Gross receipts of a mine, in excess of cost, set aside by a corporation in a depletion reserve based on discovery value, repsent realized appreciation in the value of property and are profits of the corporation. When placed in such a reserve they do not lose their character as profits. 3. Earnings and profits of a corporation available for…

1Opinion of the Court

ELTON HOYT, 2ND, PETITIONER, ET AL., 1v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.

Hoyt v. Commissioner

Docket Nos. 62905, 64691, 64710-64712, 70951-70954.

United States Board of Tax Appeals

34 B.T.A. 1011; 1936 BTA LEXIS 609;

September 29, 1936, Promulgated

1. The discovery value of a mine in excess of cost represents unrealized appreciation in the value of property and should not be included in the computation of the earnings and profits of a corporation available for distribution as taxable dividends.

2. Gross receipts of a mine, in excess of cost, set aside by a corporation in a depletion…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Palmer v. BenderSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. LaBelle Iron Works v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  3. Helvering v. CanfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  4. Stifel v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
  5. Shorb v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1931

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API