Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Whitehouse, 2294.

Decision Date17 February 1930
Docket NumberNo. 2294.,2294.
Citation38 F.2d 162
PartiesCOMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. WHITEHOUSE.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit

Morton P. Fisher, Sp. Asst. to Atty. Gen. (Sewall Key, Sp. Asst. to Atty. Gen., and C. M. Charest, Gen. Counsel, and Stanley A. Suydam, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., on the brief), for petitioner.

Robert W. Candler, of New York City and Marion N. Fisher, of Washington, D. C. (Spotswood D. Bowers, of New York City, on the brief), for Whitehouse.

Before BINGHAM, ANDERSON, and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue from an adverse decision of the Board of Tax Appeals in 7 B. T. A. 600. It involves the question whether an annuity of $5,000, bequeathed to Sybil Whitehouse by James Gordon Bennett, is taxable to her as income. Bennett, a citizen of New York, died on May 14, 1918, leaving a will, duly probated, by which the appellee and several others were left annuities aggregating over $100,000; the residue of the estate was left to a public charity, the James Gordon Bennett Memorial Home for New York Journalists, to be incorporated "as soon as practicable." Pending such incorporation, the income of the estate was left to three friends (also made executors) absolutely. The Home was organized in May, 1919, about a year after Bennett's death. By the executors' account on December 30, 1920, they show that they had permanently set aside to the Home a residue of personal property of $3,133,260, subject to taxes, annuities, and other charges. This annuity, and most of the others, were paid from the corpus of the estate, until November 14, 1920; thereafter this and most of the others, from income.

The applicable provisions of the Revenue Act of 1921, c. 136, 42 Stat. 227, 237, are as follows:

"Sec. 213. That for the purposes of this title (except as otherwise provided in section 233) the term `gross income'

"(a) Includes gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service * * * of whatever kind and in whatever form paid, or from professions, vocations, trades, businesses, commerce, or sales, or dealings in property, whether real or personal, growing out of the ownership or use of or interest in such property; also from interest, rent, dividends, securities, or the transaction of any business carried on for gain or profit, or gains or profits and income derived from any source whatever. The amount of all such items (except as provided in subdivision (e) of section 201) shall be included in the gross income for the taxable year in which received by the taxpayer; * * * but

"(b) Does not include the following items, which shall be exempt from taxation under this title: * * *

"(3) The value of property acquired by gift, bequest, devise, or descent (but the income from such property shall be included in gross income). * * *

"Sec. 219. (a) That the tax imposed by sections 210 and 211 shall apply to the income of estates or of any kind of property held in trust, including —

"(1) Income received by estates of deceased persons during the period of administration or settlement of the estate; * * *

"(4) Income which is to be distributed to the beneficiaries periodically, whether or not at regular intervals, and the income collected by a guardian of an infant to be held or distributed as the court may direct. * * *

"(c) In cases under paragraphs (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a) or in any other case within subdivision (a) of this section except paragraph (4) thereof the tax shall be imposed upon the net income of the estate or trust and shall be paid by the fiduciary, except that in determining the net income of the estate of any deceased person during the period of administration or settlement there may be deducted the amount of any income properly paid or credited to any legatee, heir, or other beneficiary. In such cases the estate or trust shall, for the purpose of the normal tax, be allowed the same credits as are allowed to single persons under section 216.

"(d) In cases under paragraph (4) of subdivision (a), and in the case of any income of an estate during the period of administration or settlement permitted by subdivision (c) to be deducted from the net income upon which tax is to be paid by the fiduciary, the tax shall not be paid by the fiduciary, but there shall be included in computing the net income of each beneficiary that part of the income of the estate or trust for its taxable year which, pursuant to the instrument or order governing the distribution, is distributable to such beneficiary, whether distributed or not, or, if his taxable year is different from that of the estate or trust, then there shall be included in computing his net income his distributive share of the income of the estate or trust for its taxable year ending within the taxable year of the beneficiary."

The present question is whether this annuity was a gift or bequest under section 213 (b) (3), supra, or was distributive income taxable under section 219 (a) (4), supra.

We think the Board of Tax Appeals was right in holding it a bequest within the fair meaning of section 213 (b) (3), and therefore not taxable as part of the annuitant's income.

In general, we observe that the opinion of the Board of Tax Appeals is sound and adequate, both in its reasoning and in its citation and treatment of the pertinent authorities; it leaves little to be added by this court.

The law of New York obviously controls in construing the will. De Vaughn v. Hutchinson, 165 U. S. 566, 570, 17 S. Ct. 461, 41 L. Ed. 827.

The corpus of the estate of the testator was charged with the payment of the annuities. No specific fund was set aside in trust for their payment. Pierrepont v. Edwards, 25 N. Y. 128; Clark v. Clark, 147 N. Y. 639, 42 N. E. 275; Peck v. Kinney (C. C. A.) 143 F. 76, and authorities cited. In Matter of Toms, 84 Misc. Rep. 312, 147 N. Y. S. 550, 554, the court said:

"Annuities like the one created by this will are simply bequests of certain...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • City Stores Company v. Smith
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • September 13, 1957
    ...11 United States v. Supplee-Biddle Hardware Co., 1924, 265 U.S. 189, 196, 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 ......
  • Coleman v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • September 21, 1945
    ...The decision of the Board as to Whitehouse was affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Whitehouse, 38 F.2d 162, and by the Supreme Court in Burnet v. Whitehouse, 1931, 283 U.S. 148, 51 S.Ct. 374, 376, 75 L.Ed. 916, 73 A.L.R. Mr. Ju......
  • Union Trust Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • November 7, 1940
    ...75 L.Ed. 916, 73 A.L.R. 1534,4 the Supreme Court upheld the Board of Tax Appeals, 7 B.T.A. 600, 606, and the Circuit Court of Appeals, 1 Cir., 38 F.2d 162, in reversing the Commissioner's refusal to exempt an annuity established by the will of James Gordon Bennett. The cestui there held exe......
  • Louisiana Oil Refining Corporation v. Reed, 5708.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • March 7, 1930

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT