# City Button Works v. Commissioner > United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 31, 1929 · 16 B.T.A. 839 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4489595 ## Case - **Full name:** CITY BUTTON WORKS, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE - **Court:** United States Board of Tax Appeals - **Decided:** May 31, 1929 - **Citations:** 16 B.T.A. 839; 1929 BTA LEXIS 2508 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Love - **Judges:** Phillips, Siefkin, Love, Muedock - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4489595 ## Opinion text *841 OPINION. Love : The sole question involved in this proceeding is whether or not, under the facts as disclosed by the record, the City Button Works and Rothschild Brothers & Co. in 1921, were affiliated corporations and entitled to make a consolidated return. Section 240 (c) prescribes that: For the purposes of this section two or more domestic corporations shall be deemed to be affiliated (1) if one corporation owns directly or controls through closely affiliated interests or by a nominee or nominees substantially all the stock of the other or others, or (2) if substantially all the stock of two or more corporations is owned or controlled by the same interests. Under a fair and reasonable interpretation of the stock ownership and control situation of the common stock, as disclosed by the record in this case, we believe it should be held, and we do so hold, that the petitioner and the Rothschild Brothers & Co. were affiliated and entitled to make consolidated return in 1921. Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered under Rule 50. Phillips, Muedock, and Siefkin dissent. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4489595. Public record. Not legal advice.