Blair v. First Trust & Savings Bank of Miami

39 F.2d 462, 2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 501, 8 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 10538, 1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 4097
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMarch 25, 1930
Docket5543
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 39 F.2d 462 (Blair v. First Trust & Savings Bank of Miami) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Blair v. First Trust & Savings Bank of Miami, 39 F.2d 462, 2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 501, 8 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 10538, 1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 4097 (5th Cir. 1930).

Opinion

FOSTER, Circuit Judge.

Respondent is a bank doing business in Miami, Fla., and as part of its business it makes and negotiates mortgage loans ón real estate. In addition to the regular interest, it charges a fee of about two per cent, for services in connection with a loan, including its negotiation with others. When a loan is approved, the commission is deducted and the net amount paid to the borrower. Respondent keeps its books and makes its returns on the cash basis. Pending the payment or the further negotiation of a loan, the commission is carried on the books as a deferred liability. When a loan is discounted with others, or is paid, the commission is credited as having been earned.

The Commissioner of Internal Revenue determined deficiencies in income and profits taxes of respondent for 1920 and 1921, respectively, of $1,000.74 and $3,154, ruling that the commissions should be returned as income received at the time the loans were made to the borrowers. On appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals, the Commissioner was reversed.

It is plain that until the loan is paid or rediscounted the respondent has earned no profit, but has simply parted with its funds on the faith of the security. The commission is not actually received until respondent gets back what it has previously paid out plus the commission. The deduction of the commission from the face of the loan brings nothing into the coffers of the bank.

We concur in the ruling of the Board of Tax Appeals.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Liftin v. Commissioner
36 T.C. 909 (U.S. Tax Court, 1961)
O'Dell v. Commissioner
26 T.C. 592 (U.S. Tax Court, 1956)
Cleaver v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
158 F.2d 342 (Seventh Circuit, 1946)
In Re Prudence Co.
98 F.2d 559 (Second Circuit, 1938)
Commissioner v. Central Republic Trust Co.
75 F.2d 708 (Seventh Circuit, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
39 F.2d 462, 2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 501, 8 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 10538, 1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 4097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blair-v-first-trust-savings-bank-of-miami-ca5-1930.