Colwell v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner was not a member of the striking union, yet he honored its picket line and received from it regular payments, calculated as a percentage of his wages but without regard to his financial status or need and with no restrictions on use. Held, such payments were not gifts, excludable under sec. 102(a), I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
Forrester, Judge:
Respondent has determined a deficiency in petitioners’ income tax for the year 1970 in the amount of $1,164.12. The sole issue presented for our decision is whether certain benefits paid to James E. Colwell during a strike against his employer constitute gifts within the meaning of section 102(a)1 and are therefore excludable from petitioners’ gross income.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.
Petitioners James E. and Madonna J. Colwell are husband and wife who resided at Petaluma, Calif., at the time the petition was filed. Petitioners filed…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Commissioner v. DubersteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Commissioner v. LoBueSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Bogardus v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- United States v. KaiserSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Brown v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1967
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Placko v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1980
- Gregory v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1986
- Colwell v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1975
- Osborne v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1995
- Placko v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.