Burnet v. Whitehouse
Decision Date | 13 April 1931 |
Docket Number | No. 129,129 |
Citation | 283 U.S. 148,73 A.L.R. 1534,51 S.Ct. 374,75 L.Ed. 916 |
Parties | BURNET, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, v. WHITEHOUSE |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Mr. G. A. Youngquist, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
Messrs. Marion N. Fisher, of Washington, D. C., and Spotswood D. Bowers, of New York City, for respondent.
The Revenue Act of 1921, c. 136, 42 Stat. 227, 233, 237, provides:
'Sec. 210. That * * * there shall be levied, collected, and paid for each taxable year upon the net income of every individual a normal tax of 8 per centum of the amount of the net income. * * *
'Sec. 211. (a) That * * * in addition to the normal tax imposed by section 210 of this Act, there shall be levied, collected, and paid for each taxable year upon the net income of every individual * * * a surtax. * * *
'Sec. 212. (a) That in the case of an individual the term 'net income' means the gross income as defined in section 213, less the deductions allowed by section 214. * * *
* * *'
James Gordon Bennett died May 24, 1918. His will provided for payment of twenty or more annuities. Among other items, it contained the following:
Item
Item
Item twenty-nine directed the executors to establish a Memorial Home, and to that end gave them the residue of the estate.
Item
The annuity for Mrs. Whitehouse was satisfied from the corpus of the estate prior to November 14, 1920; afterwards, out of income derived therefrom. December 30, 1920, the executors permanently set aside for the Memorial Home a large amount of interest-bearing securities, 'but subject to taxes, annuities, and other charges.'
The Commissioner of Internal Revenue demanded of Mrs. Whitehouse income tax for the year 1921 on the semiannual payments received during that period. She petitioned the Board of Tax Appeals for relief. It held that the bequest to her was within paragraph (b), item (3), section 213, Revenue Act of 1921, and therefore exempt. The Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit (38 F.(2d) 162), approved that conclusion.
The most plausible argument submitted for the Commissioner is this: An annuity given by will is payable primarily out of the income from the estate. The residuary estate of Bennett produced enough during 1921 to meet all bequeathed annuities. The payments received by Mrs. Whitehouse during that year were, in fact, made from such income. Consequently, it cannot be...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Burnet v. Guggenheim
-
Craig v. United States
...54 S.Ct. 221, 78 L.Ed. 365; Bishop Trust Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 9 Cir., 92 F.2d 877; Burnet v. Whitehouse, 283 U.S. 148, 51 S.Ct. 374, 75 L.Ed. 916, 73 A.L.R. 1534; Bush et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 9 Cir., 89 F.2d At the time the will and the codicil were e......
-
Dunlop v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
...v. Commissioner, 8 Cir., 145 F.2d 103, 156 A.L.R. 741; Frazer v. Driscoll, D.C., 46 F.Supp. 838; Burnet v. Whitehouse, 283 U.S. 148, 51 S.Ct. 374, 75 L.Ed. 916, 73 A.L.R. 1534; Helvering v. Pardee, 290 U.S. 365, 370, 54 S.Ct. 221, 78 L.Ed. 365; Anderson's Estate v. Commissioner, 9 Cir., 126......
-
City Stores Company v. Smith
...44 S.Ct. 546, 68 L.Ed. 970; Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Whitehouse, 1 Cir., 1930, 38 F.2d 162, 164, affirmed 1931, 283 U.S. 148, 51 S.Ct. 374, 75 L. Ed. 916; National Bank of South Carolina v. Lucas, 1929, 59 App.D.C. 157, 36 F.2d 1013. See, also, Parks-Chambers v. Commissioner of I......