May v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. Petitioner, living in California under a visitor's visa and actively engaged during the taxable year in attempting to secure required data for application for naturalization, held, to be a resident of California, and entitled to return his income from salary on a community property basis.
Read the full summary
1. Petitioner, living in California under a visitor's visa and actively engaged during the taxable year in attempting to secure required data for application for naturalization, held, to be a resident of California, and entitled to return his income from salary on a community property basis. He is entitled to a personal exemption of $2,500. 2. Amounts expended for entertainment, automobile operating costs, and telephone, telegraph, and cable charges, held, ordinary and necessary business expenses.
1Opinion of the Court
*949OPINION.
Van Fossan:
The first issue presents the question of the right of the petitioner to return his income under the community property laws of California while he was living in that state by the grace of a visitor’s visa. The petitioner contends that such laws do not discriminate against aliens, resident or nonresident, but grant them the same rights as those enjoyed by citizens of California. He insists, however, that he was a resident of that state and that, in harmony with his intent to become a citizen of the United States, he had done his utmost to perfect his application for…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Brittingham v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1976
- Faura v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1980
- Arthur T. Hadley and Susan K. Bryant v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Lloyd McKim Garrison and Sarah Garrison v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Escobar v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1977
- Brittingham v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1976
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.