Eyestone v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
The petitioner, in 1912, owning 3 farms in Kansas, entered into an agreement with his sons whereby each of the sons was to receive one-fourth of the real estate and one-fourth of the profits realized, and all were to devote their time and labor to the business and share the losses. Another farm was purchased in 1912 in the name of the petitioner. In 1919 certain oil royalty interests and oil runs were sold.
Read the full summary
The petitioner, in 1912, owning 3 farms in Kansas, entered into an agreement with his sons whereby each of the sons was to receive one-fourth of the real estate and one-fourth of the profits realized, and all were to devote their time and labor to the business and share the losses. Another farm was purchased in 1912 in the name of the petitioner. In 1919 certain oil royalty interests and oil runs were sold. Upon the evidence, held that a partnership existed between the father and the sons and that the income from the sale of the interests accrued in equal shares to the petitioner and his…
1Opinion of the Court
*1235OPINION.
Siefkin:
The sole question to be decided in this proceeding is whether the income from the sale in 1919 of certain oil royalty interests and oil runs was taxable to the petitioner alone or to the petitioner and his three sons in equal shares.
The petitioner contends that a partnership composed of himself and his three sons was formed in 1912, within the meaning of section 218 (a) of the Revenue Act of 1918, that the sons each had a one-fourth interest in the land and business, and that each is taxable upon one-fourth of the income from the sale of the oil interests.
The evidence…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Berthold v. GoldsmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1861
- Robinson v. SmalleySupreme Court of Kansas · 1918
- Huston v. CoxSupreme Court of Kansas · 1918
- Tenney v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1887
- Carothers & Searight v. AlexanderTexas Supreme Court · 1889
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Jones v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Jones v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Eyestone v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928