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
OPINION
Tannenwald, Judge:
The respondent determined a deficiency of $3,819.76 in petitioners’ Federal income tax for tbe calendar year 1965. Tlie principal issue for our consideration is whether James B. Carey (hereinafter sometimes referred to as petitioner) is entitled to deduct expenditures which he made in connection with an unsuccessful attempt to be reelected president of the International Union of Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO-CLC (hereinafter referred to as the IUE) 1
All of the facts have been stipulated, and the stipulation and exhibits attached thereto are…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- 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
- Primuth v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- McDonald v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Cloud v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1991
- James B. Carey and Margaret Carey v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1972
- Nichols v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1973
- Horace E. And Edith B. Nichols v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
- Estate of Rockefeller v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1984
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.