Miller v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
The cancellation by a corporation, with the consent of its shareholders, of a debt from its president, who was its largest shareholder, created by withdrawals over a period of years, the corporation at the time of cancellation having substantial surplus and the debtor being solvent, is not a tax-free gift, but is taxable as a dividend.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
SteRnhageN:
In 1923 the petitioner was the record owner of 90 per cent and George B. Samuel owned 10 per cent of the shares of Holland Laundry. Petitioner was president and a director. By virtue of some contract or arrangement with two others who had formerly been interested in the business and who were in some way perhaps still interested, the petitioner was in some way accountable to these persons. From 1914 through 1922, petitioner had borrowed from the corporation sums which in 1923 aggregated $71,748.94. The corporation was in some sort of difficulty and, at the suggestion of one…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. Kirby Lumber CoSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
3Cited by7 opinions
- Anderson v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1956
- Cohen v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Waggaman v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Hudson v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1936
- Miller v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1932
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.