Opinion

Smiley v. Commissioner

  • 33 B.T.A. 198
  • 1935 BTA LEXIS 788
Court
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Filed
Oct 15, 1935
Status
Published
Author
Smith
On the bench
Seawell, Smith, Agree, Murdock
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 10.7%

The opinion

Smith,

dissenting: The annuities payable to Effie E. Smiley and Ellen E. Sanborn are made a charge upon the “ Lake Mohonk property.” The petitioners are devisees of the property subject to the annual charges.

If petitioners had operated the Lake Mohonk property as executors of the will of their father they would not have been entitled to deduct the amounts paid to the annuitants in 1930, for the annuities were payable at all events. Burnet v. Whitehouse, 283 U. S. 148 ; Helvering v. Pardee, 290 U. S. 365 . The annuities were received by the annuitants as legacies. They did not constitute taxable income to them. The devisees and legatees of the residuary estate were not entitled to the deduction of the annuities. Helvering v. Pardee, supra.

In the majority opinion it is held that the taxable profits from the operation of the hotel in 1930 are after the deduction of the annuities paid. I do not think that this is so. Cf. Corbett Investment Co. v. Helvering, 75 Fed. (2d) 525. The petitioners had to pay the annuities. But they were not deductible expenses to them. They constituted capital charges.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.