Flaherty v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Flaherty v. Commissioner

35 B.T.A. 1131, 1937 BTA LEXIS 794

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedMay 20, 1937

DocketDocket No. 79397.

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 35 B.T.A. 1131 (Flaherty v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Flaherty v. Commissioner, 35 B.T.A. 1131, 1937 BTA LEXIS 794 (bta 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

[1132]*1132OPINION".

Harron :

The notice of deficiency, having been mailed to Ella T. Flaherty both as executrix and as an individual, seeks to impose liability upon Ella T. Flaherty as an individual for the entire amount of the deficiency assessed by respondent, and Ella T. Flaherty, as an individual, denies such liability. This Board has held that the ■filing of a joint return by husband and wife does not thereby make ¡ them a single taxing entity. Frank B. Gummey, 26 B. T. A. 894. The revenue act provides that “There shall be levied, collected and paid for each taxable year upon the net income of every individual a normal tax * * Sec. 11, Revenue Act of -1932. Section 51 of the same act requires that individuals in various classes file income tax returns and if a husband and wife are living together they may ... elect either to file an individual or a joint return. The taxing statute clearly seeks to tax the income of each individual and the provision for filing joint returns is a convenience. It has been held that “spouses are not jointly and severally liable for a deficiency arising entirely out of the separate income of one of them.” Cole v. Commissioner, 81 Fed. (2d) 485; Frank W. Darling, 34 B. T. A. 1062. Since none of the deficiency is attributable to the income of Ella T. Flaherty she is not individually liable for any part of the deficiency. It is held that there is no deficiency in the case of Ella T. Flaherty as an individual.

William Flaherty, deceased, failed to report income from his law practice in the net amount of $98,530.19. All of the other corrections made by the respondent also relate to the taxable net income of William Flaherty, deceased, and no evidence has been presented to overcome the respondent’s determination. The estate of William Flaherty, deceased, is therefore liable for the deficiency assessed.

Decision will be entered under Rule 50.

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

[1132]*1132OPINION".

Harron :

The notice of deficiency, having been mailed to Ella T. Flaherty both as executrix and as an individual, seeks to impose liability upon Ella T. Flaherty as an individual for the entire amount of the deficiency assessed by respondent, and Ella T. Flaherty, as an individual, denies such liability. This Board has held that the ■filing of a joint return by husband and wife does not thereby make ¡ them a single taxing entity. Frank B. Gummey, 26 B. T. A. 894. The revenue act provides that “There shall be levied, collected and paid for each taxable year upon the net income of every individual a normal tax * * Sec. 11, Revenue Act of -1932. Section 51 of the same act requires that individuals in various classes file income tax returns and if a husband and wife are living together they may ... elect either to file an individual or a joint return. The taxing statute clearly seeks to tax the income of each individual and the provision for filing joint returns is a convenience. It has been held that “spouses are not jointly and severally liable for a deficiency arising entirely out of the separate income of one of them.” Cole v. Commissioner, 81 Fed. (2d) 485; Frank W. Darling, 34 B. T. A. 1062. Since none of the deficiency is attributable to the income of Ella T. Flaherty she is not individually liable for any part of the deficiency. It is held that there is no deficiency in the case of Ella T. Flaherty as an individual.

William Flaherty, deceased, failed to report income from his law practice in the net amount of $98,530.19. All of the other corrections made by the respondent also relate to the taxable net income of William Flaherty, deceased, and no evidence has been presented to overcome the respondent’s determination. The estate of William Flaherty, deceased, is therefore liable for the deficiency assessed.

Decision will be entered under Rule 50.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 B.T.A. 1131, 1937 BTA LEXIS 794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flaherty-v-commissioner-bta-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack