Grant v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Where a husband and wife domiciled in California enter into a valid agreement that the earnings and salary of the husband after the date thereof shall be the separate income and property of the husband, no part of such earnings and salary is taxable to the wife.
1Opinion of the Court
opinion.
Lansdon:
The respondent has determined deficiencies in income tax for the years 1927,1928, 1929, and 1930 in the respective amounts *761of $1,412.76, $1,396.35, $767.72, and $1,895.43. The only issue is whether a husband and wife domiciled in California may by contract convert the earnings of the husband from community to separate income. The several proceedings were consolidated for hearing and report. The material facts have been stipulated and may be summarized as follows:
The petitioner is the wife of Edwin J. Grant and, during each of the taxable years, resided with her husband at…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. MalcolmSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Kaltschmidt v. WeberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Wren v. WrenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Smith v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Gray v. PerlisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Van Every v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940
- Ames v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Grant v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934