Thornberry Construction Co. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1DissentMiller, Judge
I am not persuaded that plaintiff has carried its burden of proving that, during its fiscal year ended March 31, 1974, and for purposes of I.R.C. § 611, it owned an "economic interest” (as distinguished from an "economic advantage”) in the No. 9 coal in place under the lease from AMAX to James R. Thornberry, as limited under the *211March 1, 1973, assignment from James R. Thornberry to plaintiff.
Pursuant to I.R.C. § 611(a), Treasury promulgated Regulation § 1.611 — 1(b)(1), defining "economic interest” thus:
An economic interest is possessed in every case in which the taxpayer has acquired by…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Palmer v. BenderSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Commissioner v. Southwest Exploration Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Helvering v. Bankline Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Kirby Petroleum Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Parsons v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.