Inaja Land Co. v. Commissioner

Last updated
Inaja Land Co. v. Commissioner[ where? ]
Seal of the United States Tax Court.svg
Court United States Tax Court
Full case nameInaja Land Company, Ltd. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
DecidedOctober 21, 1947 (1947-10-21)
Citation(s) 9 T.C. 727
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting James Russell Leech
Case opinions
Decision byLeech
Laws applied
Internal Revenue Code

Inaja Land Co., Ltd. v. Commissioner, 9 T.C. 727 (1947) [1] was a United States income tax case which discussed whether, and how much, basis the taxpayer could recover to offset a gain from compensation from the government for an easement on his land. HELD:

Contents

1. The $50,000 that petitioner received from the City -- for a right of way and an easement on taxpayer's land, and releasing the city from all claims and demands, etc. -- was lost (present) capital rather than lost (future) profits; i.e. it should be chargeable to the capital account for land, rather than treated as taxable income under I.R.C. § 22(a) [today § 61(a)]. [2]
2. Since, under the circumstances, it was practically impossible to allocate a basis to the easements granted, entirety of the net amount received will be recovered from that basis.

Facts

In 1928, the taxpayer paid $61,000 for 1,236 acres (5.00 km2) of land on the Owens River. [1] In 1934, the City[ clarification needed ] diverted polluted waters upstream from the taxpayer's property, adversely affecting the fishing on the taxpayer's property and causing flooding and erosion. The city settled with the taxpayer for $50,000; net of legal fees, taxpayer's gain was $49,000.[ citation needed ]

Issues

Does the $49,000 constitute taxable income under Section 61(a), [2] or is it chargeable to the taxpayer's capital account?

If the latter, how much basis should be recovered?

Holding and Decision

The Tax Court held that the payment was return of capital rather than lost profits. It should be chargeable to the taxpayer's capital account, as a reduction of the taxpayer's cost basis. Because the recovery did not exceed the basis of the property, it was not yet taxable.

Agreeing with the taxpayer that it is impracticable to accurately apportion a basis to the easements, the entirety of the net amount received will be reduced from that basis.[ citation needed ]

Academic Commentary

How much basis should be recovered from an easement? -- Three different cost recovery methods each has something to recommend it: [3]

1) treat easement as leasehold (analogizing the award to dividends/rent, since land, like stock, is perpetual):
  • postpone recovery of any costs until ultimate sale: the remaining land retains its basis until eventual sale, and the award is fully taxed.
  • leasehold cases-- see Commissioner v. Gillette Motor Transport, Inc., 364 U.S. 130 (1960), [4] Hort v. Commissioner, 313 U.S. 28 (1941) [5]
2) treat easement as unit sale of a section of land (since the easement is perpetual, and represents a forced divestment of the taxpayer's original property)
  • recover only the cost properly allocable to the fraction sold (even if the sale made the unsold land less attractive: that would just impact the basis of what remains.)
3) treat easement as open-ended installment sale or a down payment on the final purchase price (which today is uncertain)
  • recover costs out of the earliest proceeds of disposition -- the basis of the remaining land is diminished accordingly.
  • Inaja held this way: since properly allocating proceeds to easement would require an appraisal of the remaining land.)

Related Research Articles

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 tax credits. The difference between deductions, exemptions, and credits is that deductions and exemptions both reduce taxable income, while credits reduce tax.

A capital gains tax (CGT) is the tax on profits realized on the sale of a non-inventory asset. The most common capital gains are realized from the sale of stocks, bonds, precious metals, real estate, and property.

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Income tax in the United States</span> Form of taxation in the United States

The United States federal government and most state governments impose an income tax. They 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.

Under U.S. federal tax law, the tax basis of an asset is generally its cost basis. Determining such cost may require allocations where multiple assets are acquired together. Tax basis may be reduced by allowances for depreciation. Such reduced basis is referred to as the adjusted tax basis. Adjusted tax basis is used in determining gain or loss from disposition of the asset. Tax basis may be relevant in other tax computations.

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.

In the United States, individuals and corporations pay a tax on the net total of all their capital gains. The tax rate depends on both the investor's tax bracket and the amount of time the investment was held. Short-term capital gains are taxed at the investor's ordinary income tax rate and are defined as investments held for a year or less before being sold. Long-term capital gains, on dispositions of assets held for more than one year, are taxed at a lower rate.

Crane v. Commissioner, 331 U.S. 1 (1947), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court concerning the value, for tax purposes, of inherited property with a nonrecourse mortgage encumbering it. According to Boris I. Bittker, Crane "laid the foundation stone of most tax shelters."

Depreciation recapture is the USA Internal Revenue Service (IRS) procedure for collecting income tax on a gain realized by a taxpayer when the taxpayer disposes of an asset that had previously provided an offset to ordinary income for the taxpayer through depreciation. In other words, because the IRS allows a taxpayer to deduct the depreciation of an asset from the taxpayer's ordinary income, the taxpayer has to report any gain from the disposal of the asset as ordinary income, not as a capital gain.

Helvering v. Bruun, 309 U.S. 461 (1940), was an income tax case before the Supreme Court of the United States. It is notable for holding that under section 22(a) of the Revenue Act of 1932, a landlord realizes a taxable gain when he repossesses property, the value of which has increased because the property was improved by a tenant.

Under the U.S. tax code, businesses expenditures can be deducted from the total taxable income when filing income taxes if a taxpayer can show the funds were used for business-related activities, not personal or capital expenses. Capital expenditures either create cost basis or add to a preexisting cost basis and cannot be deducted in the year the taxpayer pays or incurs the expenditure.

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.

A like-kind exchange under United States tax law, also known as a 1031 exchange, is a transaction or series of transactions that allows for the disposal of an asset and the acquisition of another replacement asset without generating a current tax liability from the sale of the first asset. A like-kind exchange can involve the exchange of one business for another business, one real estate investment property for another real estate investment property, livestock for qualifying livestock, and exchanges of other qualifying assets. Like-kind exchanges have been characterized as tax breaks or "tax loopholes".

<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:

<i>Farid-Es-Sultaneh v. Commissioner</i>

Farid-Es-Sultaneh v. Commissioner, 160 F.2d 812 is a United States federal income tax case. It is notable for the following holding:

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

References

  1. 1 2 Inaja Land Co. v. Commissioner, 9T.C.727 (T.C.1947).
  2. 1 2 26 U.S.C.   § 61(a).
  3. ↑ Chirelstein, Marvin (2005). Federal Income Taxation: A Law Student's Guide to the Leading Cases and Concepts (Tenth ed.). New York, NY: Foundation Press. pp. 32–35. ISBN   1-58778-894-2.
  4. ↑ Commissioner v. Gillette Motor Transport, Inc., 364 U.S. 130 (1960).
  5. ↑ Hort v. Commissioner, 313 U.S. 28 (1941).
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.