Globman v. Commissioner

6 T.C.M. 1061, 1947 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 85
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedSeptember 30, 1947
DocketDocket No. 9237.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 6 T.C.M. 1061 (Globman 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
Globman v. Commissioner, 6 T.C.M. 1061, 1947 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 85 (tax 1947).

Opinion

Abe Globman v. Commissioner.
Globman v. Commissioner
Docket No. 9237.
United States Tax Court
1947 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 85; 6 T.C.M. (CCH) 1061; T.C.M. (RIA) 47261;
September 30, 1947
Morton Honeyman, Esq., 1214 Colonial-American Nat. Bank Bldg., Roanoke, Va., and Edward H. Hardy, Esq., 1203 State-Planters Bank Bldg., Richmond, Va., for the petitioner. Elmer M. Corbin, Esq., for the respondent.

KERN

Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion

Petitioner, Abe Globman, is an individual residing in Martinsville, Virginia. His income tax return for the calendar year ended December 31, 1941, was filed with the collector of internal revenue for the district of Virginia. Respondent has determined a deficiency in petitioner's income tax for the year 1941 in the amount of $22,632.41.

The questions presented for consideration are:

"(a) Whether a bona fide partnership recognizable for Federal income tax purposes existed in*86 the year 1941 between petitioner, his wife, and his son for the purpose of operating a mercantile establishment in Martinsville, Virginia, under the trade name of 'Globman's.'

"(b) Whether a bona fide partnership recognizable for Federal income tax purposes existed in the year 1941 between Daniel A. Greene and Nathan Potolsky for the purpose of operating a mercantile establishment in Galax, Virginia, under the trade name of 'Globman's' and whether any portion of the profits realized in 1941 in the operation of the business in Galax, Virginia, should be included in petitioner's income for that year."

Findings of Fact

Petitioner has been engaged in the operation of a retail clothing store in Martinsville, Virginia, under the trade name "Globman's" since 1915. Petitioner started this business a few weeks before he married his wife, Mamie. At the time of their marriage he had $400 and she had $200, which they each contributed to starting the business. Both have worked continuously in the store from its inception to the present time.

Mamie Globman has had complete charge of the ladies' ready-to-wear department of the store and has assisted petitioner in conducting the rest of the*87 business. As the store's business grew, a building next door was acquired and in about 1925 a basement store was put into operation. In 1935 the ladies' ready-to-wear department was moved to the second floor and from that time on has occupied that entire floor. Mamie Globman has, at all times, including the taxable year, been in charge of this department and supervised the employees working in it. She has about ten girls under her supervision in this department as well as three girls in the alterations department, which does alterations for the entire store. Approximately one-third of the volume of business of the store is done by Mamie Globman's department. She makes a number of buying trips regularly to purchase merchandise for her department on which she exercises her own independent judgment in determining the items and the quantities thereof which should be purchased.

No salary was paid to Mamie Globman for her services until about 1932. From 1932 through 1936 she received a salary of $50 per week. In 1937 and 1938 she received $7,600 for each year and for 1939 she was paid $6,600. The salaries received by her in 1937, 1938 and 1939 were reported on her individual income tax*88 returns for those years. Mamie Globman did not draw all of the salaries payable to her, and salaries were accumulated in her account. As at December 31, 1940, her account showed a balance to her credit in the amount of $28,656.09, of which sum $22,000 represented salaries credited to her account prior to December 31, 1939, and not paid, and the balance of $6,656.90 represented a portion of the profits for 1940 which was credited to her account.

Prior to 1939, petitioner's and Mamie Globman's son, Leon, worked in the store during his spare time and vacations from school. This continued during his six college and law school years. He graduated from the University of Virginia Law School in 1939, after having been admitted to the Virginia State Bar in 1938. He intended to practice law after graduation from law school, but in 1939 petitioner induced him to come into the business by offering him a one-third partnership interest therein, petitioner keeping two-thirds. The agreement whereby Leon became a partner in 1939 was oral. Leon put no new capital into the business.

In college Leon had received a degree in commerce and a degree in business administration and had taken courses in*89 accounting. By the time he entered the business in 1939, when he was 23 years old, he was completely familiar with the operation of the business. In 1934, when 18 years of age, Leon had taken charge of the business while petitioner and Mamie Globman took a trip abroad.

After coming into the business in 1939 Leon took complete charge of the merchandising and buying for the shoe department. He installed a modern accounting system and an efficient inventory control system. He persuaded his father to change the quality of merchandise handled by the store so that higher priced and nationally-advertised lines were carried in order to attract new customers. He conceived a plan for staging fashion shows in the store, which was an innovation. Leon planned and promoted the shows and worked with his mother in presenting them. He also conceived some contests whereby the sale of yard goods or cloth by the store was stimulated. Leon took charge of all promotional and advertising activities of the business and was successful in increasing the charge business of the store. He assisted petitioner in the operation of the store as a whole and relieved him of many responsibilities. Prior to Leon's entering*90 the business, the store had outgrown its method of operation and Leon did much to modernize and improve the operating procedures. After Leon came into the business the volume of business and the profits increased materially.

The account of Leon Globman, on the books of Globman's, Martinsville, as at January 1, 1939, showed no balance. As at December 31, of that year $3,663.42 less drawings of $382.50 was credited to his account. During 1940 there was credited to the account profits of $9,982.15 less drawings of $1,324.05, leaving a net credit of $8,660.09 and a balance of $11,941.01.

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

Related

Commissioner v. Tower
327 U.S. 280 (Supreme Court, 1946)
Lusthaus v. Commissioner
327 U.S. 293 (Supreme Court, 1946)
Lawton v. Commissioner
6 T.C. 1093 (U.S. Tax Court, 1946)
Rosenberg v. Commissioner
7 T.C. 73 (U.S. Tax Court, 1946)
Gray Printing Co. v. Commissioner
4 B.T.A. 1264 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 T.C.M. 1061, 1947 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 85, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/globman-v-commissioner-tax-1947.