Commissioner v. Boylston Market Ass'n

Last updated
Commissioner v. Boylston Market Ass'n
Seal of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.svg
Court United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Full case nameCommissioner of Internal Revenue v. Boylston Market Association
DecidedDecember 11, 1942
Citation(s) 131 F.2d 966 (1st Cir. 1942)
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Calvert Magruder, John Christopher Mahoney, Peter Woodbury
Case opinions
MajorityMahoney, joined by Magruder, Woodbury
Laws applied
Internal Revenue Code

Commissioner v. Boylston Market Association, 131 F.2d 966 (1st Cir. 1942) [1] was a taxation case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Contents

Issues

Whether a cash method taxpayer is limited to the deduction of insurance premiums actually paid in any year or whether he should deduct each year the pro rata portion of the prepaid insurance attributable to that year?

Facts

The cash method taxpayer had a business in which he owned and managed real estate. The taxpayer would purchase insurance policies covering periods of three or more years. The taxpayer would then deduct each year an insurance expense in the amount of insurance premium applicable to carrying insurance for that year regardless of the year in which the premium was actually paid.

Analysis

In Welch v. De Blois, 94 F.2d 842 (1st Cir. 1938), [2] the First Circuit allowed a cash method taxpayer to make a full deduction of insurance premiums in the year he paid them as an ordinary and necessary business expense, despite the fact that the insurance covered a three-year period. However, this court is unable to find a basis for distinguishing the prepayment of rentals, bonuses for the acquisition of leases, bonuses for the cancellation of leases, commissions for negotiating leases – all of which need to be prorated over the time period - and prepaid insurance. This court can cite no justification for treating prepaid insurance in a different manner than treating other prepayments. To permit the taxpayer to take a full deduction in the year of payment would distort his income. Moreover, prepaid insurance may be easily allocable. The insurance premium represents the protection of the property for the entire period, and the taxpayer may surrender the insurance policy at any time. Therefore, the insurance is clearly an asset having a longer life than a single taxable year. [3] Furthermore, by treating prepaid insurance as a capital expense, we are obtaining some degree of consistency. We therefore overrule Welch v. De Blois and hold that prepaid insurance deductions must be allocable over the time period for which the policy covers.

Related Research Articles

An expense is an item requiring an outflow of money, or any form of fortune in general, to another person or group as payment for an item, service, or other category of costs. For a tenant, rent is an expense. For students or parents, tuition is an expense. Buying food, clothing, furniture, or an automobile is often referred to as an expense. An expense is a cost that is "paid" or "remitted", usually in exchange for something of value. Something that seems to cost a great deal is "expensive". Something that seems to cost little is "inexpensive". "Expenses of the table" are expenses for dining, refreshments, a feast, etc.

Tax deduction is a reduction of income that is able to be taxed and is commonly a result of expenses, particularly those incurred to produce additional income. Tax deductions are a form of tax incentives, along with exemptions and credits. The difference between deductions, exemptions and credits is that deductions and exemptions both reduce taxable income, while credits reduce tax.

Under United States tax law, itemized deductions are eligible expenses that individual taxpayers can claim on federal income tax returns and which decrease their taxable income, and is claimable in place of a standard deduction, if available.

Life insurance Type of contract

Life insurance is a contract between an insurance policy holder and an insurer or assurer, where the insurer promises to pay a designated beneficiary a sum of money upon the death of an insured person. Depending on the contract, other events such as terminal illness or critical illness can also trigger payment. The policy holder typically pays a premium, either regularly or as one lump sum. The benefits may include other expenses, such as funeral expenses.

Universal life insurance is a type of cash value life insurance, sold primarily in the United States. Under the terms of the policy, the excess of premium payments above the current cost of insurance is credited to the cash value of the policy, which is credited each month with interest. The policy is debited each month by a cost of insurance (COI) charge as well as any other policy charges and fees drawn from the cash value, even if no premium payment is made that month. Interest credited to the account is determined by the insurer but has a contractual minimum rate. When an earnings rate is pegged to a financial index such as a stock, bond or other interest rate index, the policy is an "Indexed universal life" contract. Such policies offer the advantage of guaranteed level premiums throughout the insured's lifetime at a substantially lower premium cost than an equivalent whole life policy at first. The cost of insurance always increases, as is found on the cost index table. That not only allows for easy comparison of costs between carriers but also works well in irrevocable life insurance trusts (ILITs) since cash is of no consequence.

Deferral Term in accounting

A deferral, in accrual accounting, is any account where the income or expense is not recognised until a future date, e.g. annuities, charges, taxes, income, etc. The deferred item may be carried, dependent on type of deferral, as either an asset or liability. See also accrual.

A tax refund or tax rebate is a payment to the taxpayer when the taxpayer pays more tax than they owe.

Adjusting entries

In accounting/accountancy, adjusting entries are journal entries usually made at the end of an accounting period to allocate income and expenditure to the period in which they actually occurred. The revenue recognition principle is the basis of making adjusting entries that pertain to unearned and accrued revenues under accrual-basis accounting. They are sometimes called Balance Day adjustments because they are made on balance day.

Matching principle

In accrual accounting, the matching principle instructs that an expense should be reported in the same period in which the corresponding revenue is earned, and is associated with accrual accounting and the revenue recognition principle states that revenues should be recorded during the period in which they are earned, regardless of when the transfer of cash occurs. By recognizing costs in the period they are incurred, a business can see how much money was spent to generate revenue, reducing "noise" from timing mismatch between when costs are incurred and when revenue is realized. Conversely, cash basis accounting calls for the recognition of an expense when the cash is paid, regardless of when the expense was actually incurred.

Income taxes in the United States are imposed by the federal government, and most states. The income taxes are determined by applying a tax rate, which may increase as income increases, to taxable income, which is the total income less allowable deductions. Income is broadly defined. Individuals and corporations are directly taxable, and estates and trusts may be taxable on undistributed income. Partnerships are not taxed, but their partners are taxed on their shares of partnership income. Residents and citizens are taxed on worldwide income, while nonresidents are taxed only on income within the jurisdiction. Several types of credits reduce tax, and some types of credits may exceed tax before credits. An alternative tax applies at the federal and some state levels.

Generally, expenses related to the carrying-on of a business or trade are deductible from a United States taxpayer's adjusted gross income. For many taxpayers, this means that expenses related to seeking new employment, including some relevant expenses incurred for the taxpayer's education, can be deducted, resulting in a tax break, as long as certain criteria are met. On average, United States job seekers can spend upwards of $300 per month in related job-seeking services.

<i>Zaninovich v. Commissioner</i> US court case

Zaninovich v. Commissioner, 616 F.2d 429, is a United States court case about the deductibility of advance payments for tax purposes.

Basis of accounting The time when financial transactions are reported

A basis of accounting is the time various financial transactions are recorded. The cash basis and the accrual basis are the two primary methods of tracking income and expenses in accounting.

<i>Pevsner v. Commissioner</i>

Pevsner v. Commissioner, 628 F.2d 467 is a United States federal income tax case before the Fifth Circuit. It dealt with the issue of whether clothes purchased solely for use at work could be treated as a business expense deduction on a taxpayer's return.

Under the United States taxation system, an enterprise may deduct business expenses from its taxable income, subject to certain conditions. On occasion the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has challenged such deductions, regarding the activities in question as illegitimate, and in certain circumstances the Internal Revenue Code provides for such challenge. Rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court have in general upheld the deductions, where there is not a specific governmental policy in support of disallowing them.

Section 162(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, is part of United States taxation law. It concerns deductions for business expenses. It is one of the most important provisions in the Code, because it is the most widely used authority for deductions. If an expense is not deductible, then Congress considers the cost to be a consumption expense. Section 162(a) requires six different elements in order to claim a deduction. It must be an

Gold Coast Hotel & Casino v. United States, 158 F.3d 484, was a court case that addressed whether a casino, using the accrual method of accounting, could deduct the value of slot club points earned by slot club members in the tax year in which the members accumulated the minimum points required to redeem a prize, or whether the casino had to wait to deduct the value of the slot club points until the members actually redeemed them.

<i>Grynberg v. Commissioner</i>

Grynberg v. Commissioner, 83 T.C. 255 (1984) was a case in which the United States Tax Court held that one taxpayer's prepaid business expenses were not ordinary and necessary expenses of the years in which they were made, and therefore the prepayments were not tax deductible. Taxpayers in the United States often seek to maximize their income and decrease their tax liability by prepaying deductible expenses and taking a deduction earlier rather than in a later tax year.

In the United States, the question whether any compensation plan is qualified or non-qualified is primarily a question of taxation under the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). Any business prefers to deduct its expenses from its income, which will reduce the income subject to taxation. Expenses which are deductible ("qualified") have satisfied tests required by the IRC. Expenses which do not satisfy those tests ("non-qualified") are not deductible; even though the business has incurred the expense, the amount of that expenditure remains as part of taxable income. In most situations, any business will attempt to satisfy the requirements so that its expenditures are deductible business expenses.

<i>Ochs v. Commissioner</i> American legal case

Ochs v. Commissioner, 195 F.2d 692 was an income tax case decided by Judge Augustus Noble Hand.

References

  1. Commissioner v. Boylston Market Ass'n, 131F.2d966 (1st Cir.1942).
  2. Welch v. De Blois, 94F.2d842 (1st Cir.1938).
  3. Treasury Regulation § 1.461-1(a)(1). “If an expenditure results in the creation of an asset having a useful life which extends substantially beyond the close of the taxable year, such an expenditure may not be deductible, or may be deductible only in part, for the taxable year in which it was made.”