Hoskins v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Petitioner, about 50 years of age, employed as a bookkeeper, maintained an apartment in which she and her adult niece, about 30 years of age, who had part time employment as a stenographer, lived. Held, under the facts petitioner is not entitled to an exemption of $2,500 as "head of a family" under section 25(b), Revenue Acts of 1934 and 1936.
1Opinion of the Court
*118OPINION.
Aknold:
Section 25 (b) of the Bevenue Acts of 1984 and 1936 allows a personal exemption for the purposes of the normal tax and the surtax of $2,500 “in the case of the head of a family.” No statutory definition is given as to what constitutes the “head of a family.” *119Bespondent’s regulations, article 25-4 of Begulations 86 and 94, define the head of a family as:
* * * an individual who actually supports and maintains in one Rouse-hold one or more individuals who are closely connected with him by blood relationship, relationship by marriage, or by adoption, and whose right to exercise…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Brick v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1943
- Estate of Williamson v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1944
- Frankenau v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1943
- Hoskins v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1940
- Howard v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1940
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.