Smith v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. Petitioner created a trust, retaining the power, in conjunction with two others, to revest the corpus of the trust. Held, the income of such trust is taxable to the petitioner under section 219 (g) of the Revenue Acts of 1924 and 1926. 2. Petitioner created a trust for her four sons and also created in herself, her husband, and three others a joint power to change and alter the trust, appoint new beneficiaries, etc.
Read the full summary
1. Petitioner created a trust, retaining the power, in conjunction with two others, to revest the corpus of the trust. Held, the income of such trust is taxable to the petitioner under section 219 (g) of the Revenue Acts of 1924 and 1926. 2. Petitioner created a trust for her four sons and also created in herself, her husband, and three others a joint power to change and alter the trust, appoint new beneficiaries, etc. Held, such power did not make petitioner's husband a beneficiary of the trust within the meaning of the Revenue Act.
1Opinion of the Court
*633OPINION.
Maequette:
The sole issue here presented is whether the income of the four trusts created by the petitioner is properly taxable to her.
The Revenue Acts of 1924 and 1926 each contain the following provision:
Sec. 219. (g) Where the grantor of a trust has, at any time during the taxable year, either alone or in conjunction with any person not a beneficiary of the trust, the power to revest in himself title to any part of the corpus of the trust, then the income of such part of the trust for such taxable year shall be included in computing the net income of the grantor.
The petitioner’s…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Corliss v. BowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Dillenbeck v. PinnellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- County of Chicot v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Bauer v. MyersCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1917
- Matz v. Chicago & A. R.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri · 1898
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Schweitzer v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Bromley v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1932
- Smith v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1931
- Stetson v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1932