Burnet v. Logan

Last updated

Burnet v. Logan
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued April 29, 1931
Decided May 18, 1931
Full case nameBurnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Logan
Citations283 U.S. 404 ( more )
51 S. Ct. 550; 75 L. Ed. 1143
Case history
Prior42 F.2d 193 (2d Cir. 1930)
Holding
Prior to return of the amount at which the bequest was valued for federal estate tax purposes, the payments received by the legatee are not income.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Charles E. Hughes
Associate Justices
Oliver W. Holmes Jr.  · Willis Van Devanter
James C. McReynolds  · Louis Brandeis
George Sutherland  · Pierce Butler
Harlan F. Stone  · Owen Roberts
Case opinion
MajorityMcReynolds, joined by unanimous

Burnet v. Logan, 283 U.S. 404 (1931), was a case before the United States Supreme Court.

Contents

Facts

Respondent, Mrs. Logan, before March 1913 and until March 11, 1916, owned shares in Andrews & Hitchcock Iron Company which in turn held 12% in Mahoning Ore & Steel Company which mined iron ore. [1] Andrews & Hitchcock was later acquired by the Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company. [1] Youngstown Sheet and Tube agreed to pay $2.2 million to the shareholders and 60 cents annually thereafter for each ton of ore apportioned to their shares. [2] The respondent received this money over time but claimed that no income tax should arise until she received the total amount of the sale of her stock equal to its value on March 1, 1913. [2] The Commissioner of Internal Revenue ruled that the obligation to pay 60 cents per ton had a fair market value of almost $2 million, and "that this value should be treated as so much cash and the sale of the stock regarded as a closed transaction with no profit in 1916". [3] The Circuit Court of Appeals held that it was impossible to determine with certainty the fair market value of the agreement. [4] Hence, the respondent was entitled to the return of her capital before she could be charged with any taxable income. [5] Since her capital had not been returned, there was no taxable income. [5]

Holding

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with the result reached by the Circuit Court of Appeals. [5] When the profit of a transaction, if any, is realized, then the taxpayer will be required to respond. [6] To determine whether there is a gain or loss, the initial capital at the beginning of the period in consideration must first be recovered. As annual payments from extracted ore are paid, they can be apportioned as the return of capital and later profit. The liability for income tax can be fairly determined without resorting to conjecture. The initial promise has no ascertainable fair market value, so the transaction was not closed. Mrs. Logan may never have recouped her initial investments from payments that were promised to her. Based on the facts, there is no way to fairly evaluate the promise of 60 cents a ton for an undisclosed portion of time. Therefore, income will only be included after all the bases have been recovered.

Significance

The case presents an example of an open transaction case. Philadelphia Park Amusement Co. v. United States [7] tells us that commonly, the value of what one receives will be the value of what one gives up in an exchange, or, more generally, in an arm's length transaction, the fair market values of the transaction will be equal. However, this is a situation where neither value is known, and so the valuation of the transaction is left open. Even though this is still considered a good law, it has fallen by the wayside and is rarely used, partially because it is often considered too generous because one is deemed to have no income while recovering. Generally, the open transaction doctrine will only be used in the rare occurrence where the fair market value of a contingent payment obligation cannot be reasonably ascertained. [8]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dividend</span> Payment made by a corporation to its shareholders, usually as a distribution of profits

A dividend is a distribution of profits by a corporation to its shareholders. When a corporation earns a profit or surplus, it is able to pay a portion of the profit as a dividend to shareholders. Any amount not distributed is taken to be re-invested in the business. The current year profit as well as the retained earnings of previous years are available for distribution; a corporation is usually prohibited from paying a dividend out of its capital. Distribution to shareholders may be in cash or, if the corporation has a dividend reinvestment plan, the amount can be paid by the issue of further shares or by share repurchase. In some cases, the distribution may be of assets.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Balance sheet</span> Accounting financial summary

In financial accounting, a balance sheet is a summary of the financial balances of an individual or organization, whether it be a sole proprietorship, a business partnership, a corporation, private limited company or other organization such as government or not-for-profit entity. Assets, liabilities and ownership equity are listed as of a specific date, such as the end of its financial year. A balance sheet is often described as a "snapshot of a company's financial condition". It is the summary of each and every financial statement of an organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Historical cost</span>

The historical cost of an asset at the time it is acquired or created is the value of the costs incurred in acquiring or creating the asset, comprising the consideration paid to acquire or create the asset plus transaction costs. Historical cost accounting involves reporting assets and liabilities at their historical costs, which are not updated for changes in the items' values. Consequently, the amounts reported for these balance sheet items often differ from their current economic or market values.

Market value or OMV is the price at which an asset would trade in a competitive auction setting. Market value is often used interchangeably with open market value, fair value or fair market value, although these terms have distinct definitions in different standards, and differ in some circumstances.

Although the actual definitions vary between jurisdictions, in general, a direct tax or income tax is a tax imposed upon a person or property as distinct from a tax imposed upon a transaction, which is described as an indirect tax. There is a distinction between direct and indirect tax depending on whether the tax payer is the actual taxpayer or if the amount of tax is supported by a third party, usually a client. The term may be used in economic and political analyses, but does not itself have any legal implications. However, in the United States, the term has special constitutional significance because of a provision in the U.S. Constitution that any direct taxes imposed by the national government be apportioned among the states on the basis of population. In the European Union direct taxation remains the sole responsibility of member states.

Nonrecourse debt or a nonrecourse loan is a secured loan (debt) that is secured by a pledge of collateral, typically real property, but for which the borrower is not personally liable. If the borrower defaults, the lender can seize and sell the collateral, but if the collateral sells for less than the debt, the lender cannot seek that deficiency balance from the borrower—its recovery is limited only to the value of the collateral. Thus, nonrecourse debt is typically limited to 50% or 60% loan-to-value ratios, so that the property itself provides "overcollateralization" of the loan.

For households and individuals, gross income is the sum of all wages, salaries, profits, interest payments, rents, and other forms of earnings, before any deductions or taxes. It is opposed to net income, defined as the gross income minus taxes and other deductions.

Under Section 1031 of the United States Internal Revenue Code, a taxpayer may defer recognition of capital gains and related federal income tax liability on the exchange of certain types of property, a process known as a 1031 exchange. In 1979, this treatment was expanded by the courts to include non-simultaneous sale and purchase of real estate, a process sometimes called a Starker exchange.

Leaseback, short for "sale-and-leaseback", is a financial transaction in which one sells an asset and leases it back for the long term; therefore, one continues to be able to use the asset but no longer owns it. The transaction is generally done for fixed assets, notably real estate, as well as for durable and capital goods such as airplanes and trains. The concept can also be applied by national governments to territorial assets; prior to the Falklands War, the government of the United Kingdom proposed a leaseback arrangement whereby the Falklands Islands would be transferred to Argentina, with a 99-year leaseback period, and a similar arrangement, also for 99 years, had been in place prior to the handover of Hong Kong to mainland China. Leaseback arrangements are usually employed because they confer financing, accounting or taxation benefits.

Amount realized, in US federal income tax law, is defined by section 1001(b) of Internal Revenue Code. It is one of two variables in the formula used to compute gains and losses to determine gross income for income tax purposes. The excess of the amount realized over the adjusted basis is the amount of realized gain or realized loss.

In United States income tax law, an installment sale is generally a "disposition of property where at least 1 loan payment is to be received after the close of the taxable year in which the disposition occurs." The term "installment sale" does not include, however, a "dealer disposition" or, generally, a sale of inventory. The installment method of accounting provides an exception to the general principles of income recognition by allowing a taxpayer to defer the inclusion of income of amounts that are to be received from the disposition of certain types of property until payment in cash or cash equivalents is received. The installment method defers the recognition of income when compared with both the cash and accrual methods of accounting. Under the cash method, the taxpayer would recognize the income when it is received, including the entire sum paid in the form of a negotiable note. The deferral advantages of the installment method are the most pronounced when comparing to the accrual method, under which a taxpayer must recognize income as soon as he or she has a right to the income.

<i>Cowden v. Commissioner</i>

Cowden v. Commissioner, 289 F.2d 20, outlined the factors used to determine whether something received is a cash equivalent, in other words, whether something received is taxable when it was received or when it was assigned. The court observed two main doctrines in determining when something is taxable. The court relied on the doctrines of constructive receipt and cash equivalence while reiterating that substance rather than form should control income tax laws.

<i>Warren Jones Co. v. Commissioner</i>

Warren Jones Company v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 524 F.2d 788 was a taxation decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Tax protesters in the United States advance a number of constitutional arguments asserting that the imposition, assessment and collection of the federal income tax violates the United States Constitution. These kinds of arguments, though related to, are distinguished from statutory and administrative arguments, which presuppose the constitutionality of the income tax, as well as from general conspiracy arguments, which are based upon the proposition that the three branches of the federal government are involved together in a deliberate, on-going campaign of deception for the purpose of defrauding individuals or entities of their wealth or profits. Although constitutional challenges to U.S. tax laws are frequently directed towards the validity and effect of the Sixteenth Amendment, assertions that the income tax violates various other provisions of the Constitution have been made as well.

<i>Raytheon Production Corp. v. Commissioner</i>

Raytheon Production Corp. v. Commissioner, 144 F.2d 110, cert. denied, 323 U.S. 779 (1944) is a United States income tax case that discusses the tax deductibility of damages for loss of business good will. It included the following holdings:

Dobson v. Commissioner, 320 U.S. 489 (1943), was a United States Supreme Court case related to income tax.

<i>Wills v. Commissioner</i>

Wills v. Commissioner, 411 F. 2d 537 was a United States taxation case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 1969.

<i>Jordan Marsh Co. v. Commissioner</i> American legal case

Jordan Marsh Co. v. Commissioner, 269 F.2d 453 was a United States income tax case decided by the Second Circuit.

Taxation of income in the United States has been practised since colonial times. Some southern states imposed their own taxes on income from property, both before and after Independence. The Constitution empowered the federal government to raise taxes at a uniform rate throughout the nation, and required that "direct taxes" be imposed only in proportion to the Census population of each state. Federal income tax was first introduced under the Revenue Act of 1861 to help pay for the Civil War. It was renewed in later years and reformed in 1894 in the form of the Wilson-Gorman tariff.

References

  1. 1 2 Burnet v. Logan, 283 U.S. 404, 409 (1931).
  2. 1 2 Burnet, 283 U.S. at 410.
  3. Burnet, 283 U.S. at 411.
  4. Logan v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 42F.2d193 , 197( 2d Cir. 1930).
  5. 1 2 3 Burnet, 283 U.S. at 412.
  6. Burnet, 283 U.S. at 413.
  7. Philadelphia Park Amusement Co. v. United States , 126F. Supp.184 (Ct. Cl.1954).
  8. S. Rep. No. 1000, 96th Cong., 2d Sess., reprinted in 1980-2 CB 494, 506-507.