Carey v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner husband incurred certain expenses in an unsuccessful attempt to be reelected president of a large labor union. Held, the expenses of seeking reelection are not allowable as a deduction. Held, further, that petitioner is entitled to deduct under sec. 162, I.R.C. 1954, the legal expenses incurred in defending an action arising out of the performance of his duties as president of the union.
1Opinion of the Court
James B. and Margaret Carey, Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Carey v. Commissioner
Docket No. 5556-68
United States Tax Court
56 T.C. 477; 1971 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 124;
June 14, 1971, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 50.
Petitioner husband incurred certain expenses in an unsuccessful attempt to be reelected president of a large labor union. Held, the expenses of seeking reelection are not allowable as a deduction. Held, further, that petitioner is entitled to deduct under sec. 162, I.R.C. 1954, the legal expenses incurred in defending an action arising out of the…
Also in this document: Concurrence; Dissent · Simpson; Dissent · Sterrett.
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Welch v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Deputy, Administratrix v. Du PontSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- United States v. GilmoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Old Colony Railroad v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Commissioner v. TellierSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.