Magneson v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioners exchanged their fee simple interest in I real property for an undivided 10-percent interest in P real property which they immediately contributed to a partnership for a general partnership interest. P and I are properties of like kind. Held, the exchange of I for P qualifies for nonrecognition of gain under sec. 1031(a), I.R.C. 1954, because petitioners held P for productive use in trade or business or for investment.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Goffe, Judge:
The Commissioner determined a deficiency in petitioners’ Federal income tax for the taxable year 1977 in the amount of $19,563. The sole issue for decision is whether the exchange of petitioners’ fee simple interest in real property for a 10-percent undivided interest in other real property followed immediately by contribution of the 10-percent interest to a partnership for a 10-percent interest therein qualifies for nonrecognition treatment under section 1031(a).1
This case was submitted fully stipulated pursuant to Rule 122 of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bull v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Key Buick Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1977
- Key Buick Company v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- McQuiston v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1982
- Koch v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1978
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Joseph R. Bolker v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Norman J. And Beverly G. Magneson v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Bussing v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1987
- Bolker v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1983
- Holiday Village Shopping Center ex rel. Mitchell v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.