Fawcus Mach Co v. United States

Decision Date05 January 1931
Docket NumberNo. 40,40
Citation75 L.Ed. 397,282 U.S. 375,51 S.Ct. 144
PartiesFAWCUS MACH. CO. v. UNITED STATES
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Mr. James S. Y. Ivins, of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

The Attorney General and Mr. Claude R. Branch, of Providence, R. I., for the United States.

[Argument of Counsel from page 376 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court.

Certiorari was granted to the Court of Claims, 281 U. S. 711, 50 S. Ct. 346, 74 L. Ed. 1133, to review a judgment, 68 Ct. Cl. 784, in favor of the United States in an action to recover an alleged overpayment of excess profits tax for the calendar year 1919. The petitioner, a corporation, kept its books and made its returns of income and excess profits taxes on the accrual basis. In its return for the year ended December 31, 1919, it did not deduct from invested capital any amount on account of income and excess profits taxes for 1918 assessed and paid in 1919.

The Commissioner of Internal Revenue determined that the invested capital for 1919 should be reduced by the amount of income and profits taxes for 1918 as of the dates in 1919 when the instalments of taxes fell due and were paid. To accomplish this he computed an average deduction for the year 1919, and diminished the earned surplus as of January 1, 1919, by subtracting from it the amount so ascertained.

The Commissioner's action was in accordance with article 845 of Treasury Regulations 45, promulgated April 17, 1919, applicable to the Revenue Act of 1918. The pertinent portion follows:

'Federal income * * * taxes are deemed to have been paid out of the net income of the taxable year for which they are levied.'

Section 326(a) of the Revenue Act of 1918 (40 Stat. 1092) provided that 'as used in this title the term 'invested capital' for any year means:

'* * *;

'(1) Actual cash bona fide paid in for stock or shares;

'(2) Actual cash value of tangible property, other than cash, bona fide paid in for stock or shares; * * *

'(3) Paid-in or earned surplus and undivided profits; not including surplus and undivided profits earned during the year.' Petitioner asserts that article 845 was based on the erroneous assumption that income taxes are payable out of the net income of the taxable year for which they are levied.

The United States replies that it is, and since 1914 it has been, required that a taxpayer shall keep his books and make his returns on a basis which will reflect true income; that while the taxes for any year are not payable until the following year, good accounting practice requires an accrual of them as a liability of the current year's business; and that the regulation in question was not only reasonable, but necessary for proper administration of the Revenue Act.

The position of the government is sound. A corporation cannot claim to have accumulated any net income in any year until provision is made for taxes accrued, based on net income for the same year.

The reasonableness of the regulation is further shown by the fact that 'invested capital' was merely a legislative definition of an element in the formula prescribed for computation of excess profits tax. Congress might have expressly declared that taxes should be excluded from invested capital. It did not do so in section 326(a), or elsewhere in the act. The regulations were made pursuant to express authority (see section 1309 of the Revenue Act of 1918). They are valid unless unreasonable or inconsistent with the statute. United States v. Grimaud, 220 U. S. 506, 517, 518, 31 S. Ct. 480, 55 L. Ed. 563; International Ry. Co. v. Davidson, 257 U. S. 506, 514, 42 S. Ct. 179, 66 L. Ed. 341. They constitute contemporaneous construction...

To continue reading

Request your trial
241 cases
  • Duke Power Company v. Federal Power Commission, 20578.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 28 Junio 1968
    ...United States v. American Trucking Ass'n, 310 U.S. 534, 549, 60 S.Ct. 1059, 84 L.Ed. 1345 (1949); Fawcus Mfg. Co. v. United States, 282 U.S. 375, 378, 51 S.Ct. 144, 75 L.Ed. 397 (1931). 162 For a short period commencing in 1944 the Commission exercised jurisdiction over the acquisition of f......
  • American Can Co. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Docket No. 69174.
    • United States
    • United States Tax Court
    • 16 Noviembre 1961
    ...1953 appears to have been in contest between the parties at one time. However, petitioner's opening brief relied upon Fawcus Machine Co. v. United States, 282 U.S. 375,to establish that the liability accrued in 1953. The Government's brief neither attempts to distinguish the Fawcus case, no......
  • NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MOTOR BUS OWNERS v. Brinegar, 71-1268.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 26 Julio 1973
    ...Nitrogen Prods. Co. v. United States, 288 U.S. 294, 324-325, 53 S.Ct. 350, 77 L.Ed. 796 (1933); Fawcus Mfg. Co. v. United States, 282 U.S. 375, 378, 51 S.Ct. 144, 75 L.Ed. 397 (1931). 66 49 C.F.R. § 569.7(a) (1972), quoted in part supra note 4. 67 Ante pp. 1303-1304. 68 See note 3, supra. 6......
  • Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Docket Nos. 971-72
    • United States
    • United States Tax Court
    • 30 Junio 1981
    ...purpose (see secs. 48(b) and 167(b)), respondent's regulations are entitled to a heavy presumption of validity. Fawcus Machine Co. v. United States, 282 U.S. 375 (1931). See also Catron v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 306, 309 (1968). 49. In the statutory notices of deficiency issued in docket Nos......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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