Dohrmann v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. During 1920 petitioner exchanged certain assets for 50 per cent of the capital stock of a new corporation. Held, upon the evidence, that the new stock received in exchange had no "fair market value" within the meaning of that term as used in section 202(b) of the Revenue Act of 1918. 2. Under the decision by the Supreme Court in the case of Lucas v. Earl,281 U.S. 111, held, that the salary in question was correctly returned by the wife, who earned it.
1Opinion of the Court
*511OPINION.
Love:
The issues in this proceeding are (1) whether the petitioner realized a taxable profit in 1920 when he exchanged certain assets for 50 per cent of the stock of a newly organized corporation, and (2) whether salaries paid to the petitioner’s wife are taxable to the petitioner.
The applicable statute in connection with the first issue is section 202 (b) of the 1918 Act, which, so far as is material, provides as follows:
*512When property is exchanged for other property, the property received m exchange shall for the purpose of determining gain or loss be treated as the equivalent of cash…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lucas v. EarlSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- United States v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Ray Consolidated Copper Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Walter v. DuffyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1923
3Cited by14 opinions
- Harriet T. Righter, of the Estate of Jessie H. Righter v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1971
- Drybrough v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1962
- Wood v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1939
- Tex-Penn Oil Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Eisendrath v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.