holding that risk-shifting and risk- distributing “are necessary to the existence of insurance”
How later courts described this case
- holding that risk-shifting and risk- distributing “are necessary to the existence of insurance”
- noting that the four factors are not independent or exclusive but establish a framework for determining “the existence of insurance for Federal tax purposes”
- 52% to 74% writing for unrelated parties
- between 52% and 74% of insured risks were outside risks
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WHALEN, J., dissenting: I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case for the reasons stated in the “payments to insurance company subsidiary” segment of my dissenting opinion in Sears, Roebuck & Co. and Affiliated Corps, v. Commissioner, 96 T.C. 61 (1991), docket No. 2165-89, released today.
CHABOT and PARKER, J.J., agree with this dissent.