General Retail Corp. v. Commissioner

29 T.C. 632, 1957 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 3
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedDecember 31, 1957
DocketDocket No. 55272
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 29 T.C. 632 (General Retail Corp. v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
General Retail Corp. v. Commissioner, 29 T.C. 632, 1957 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 3 (tax 1957).

Opinion

OPINION.

Opper, Judge:

Petitioner claims to be entitled to the preferential tax treatment accorded “a new corporation” under section 430 (e), I. E. C. 1939, as added by the Excess Profits Tax Act1 of 1950. The facts are not in dispute. Petitioner acquired all of its assets from its parent, General, and while petitioner concededly commenced business after July 1, 1945, General had been operating since 1925. Petitioner says that its stock was owned by General and not by General’s stockholders, and respondent insists that the rule of attribution requires that petitioner’s stock be considered as being held by General’s stockholders.

What the issue really comes down to is whether the formula of section 503 can and must be imported into section 430 (e). The statute says in effect that corporations can qualify under section 430 (e) as having “commenced business” only if they would likewise so qualify as described in section 445.2 Section 445 .expressly requires for its application the use of the principle of section 503.3 We fail to see, therefore, how a corporation can have the benefits of not having commenced business before July 1, 1945, under section 445 without applying section 503; and if not a corporation which commenced business after 1945 under section 445, it does not qualify for the benefits of section 430 (e), where section 445 (g) applies as it does here.

In order to clarify what we think is the consequently inevitable effect of the interconnected statutory provisions, we set forth below a paraphrased version of the interplay of the three sections and their application to petitioner’s situation:

In the case of * * ♦ [petitioner if it] commenced business [as limited below] after July 1, 1945, and * * * [its] fifth taxable year ends after June 30, 1950, the amount * * * [of excess profits tax] shall be [4] [computed at a preferential rate.]
[Petitioner] * * * shall be considered to have been in existence and to have had taxable years for any period during which [General] * * * was in existence, and * * * [petitioner] shall be [then] considered to have commenced business [in 1925,5] * * * the earliest date on which * * * [General] commenced business :[6] [if General] * * * during or prior to the [year ended October 31, 1951] * * * was a party with * * * [petitioner] to a transaction described * * * [as[7]
The acquisition by * * * [petitioner] of * * * its assets from * * * [General], if * * * the outstanding stock * * * of * * * [petitioner] is * * * [considered as] owned, at the time of such acquisition, by individuals owning * * * [proportionally] 50 per centum or more in value of the outstanding stock * * * of * * * [General;8 by reason that] stock [of petitioner] owned, * * * by * * * [General] * * * shall be considered as being owned proportionately by [General’s] shareholders * * *[9]

We think it inevitably follows that respondent is correct that petitioner cannot qualify as having commenced business after July 1,1945; that section 430 (e) is accordingly inapplicable, and that, as a consequence, the deficiency was correctly determined. With such a clear statutory command, the legislative history is not available even were it more persuasive than is the present case. John H. Watson, Jr., 27 B.T. A. 463,465.

Decision will he entered for the respondent.

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

Related

Robert L. Phinney v. Tuboscope Company
268 F.2d 233 (Fifth Circuit, 1959)
General Retail Corp. v. Commissioner
29 T.C. 632 (U.S. Tax Court, 1957)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 T.C. 632, 1957 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 3, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/general-retail-corp-v-commissioner-tax-1957.