Monroe v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner and his son executed an agreement of partnership under which his minor son agreed to devote his entire time to the business. The son, a minor, returned to school shortly after the agreement was executed. The facts show that he did not contribute any capital to the business originating with himself. Held, that petitioner is taxable on the entire income of the business.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Harron, Judge-.
The question is, briefly, whether petitioner4s taxable on all of the income of his business enterprises, as respondent has determined, or on only one-half of such income, as petitioner contends.
The question arises under section 22 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code. Under section 22 (a) the question is: Was the income attributed to petitioner’s son Moi, Jr., as a partner income from a partnership for which he alone is liable in his “individual capacity,” as provided by sections 181 and 182 of the code, or did petitioner, his father, despite the claimed partnership,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Helvering v. HorstSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Commissioner v. TowerSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Lusthaus v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- De Korse v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1945
- Ennis v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Harris v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Ritter v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Harris v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Monroe v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1946
- W. Hines v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.