Johnson v. Commissioner
This text of 21 T.C. 733 (Johnson 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.
Opinion
OPINION.
It is by now well settled that a withdrawing partner is chargeable with ordinary income on his share of the partnership profits, whether currently distributed or not, up to the time of his withdrawal. LeSage v. Commissioner, (C. A. 5) 173 F. 2d 826; Louis Karsch, 6 T. C. 1327. This is so notwithstanding that he sells his interest to the continuing partner.
Respondent has determined the deficiency here as though petitioner’s 50 per cent partnership interest terminated on May 20. The sole question is whether there was a termination of that 50 per cent interest at any earlier time.
That there was no change in the equal profit sharing ratio prior to the sale of petitioner’s interest is clear from petitioner’s own testimony.1 And the purpose of restricting the drawing accounts in April was not to change the profit ratio but rather to make an interim agreement “until [as petitioner testified] we came to some settlement of selling out to one another.”
Nor was petitioner’s interest terminated at an earlier time.- It was not until May 20 or later that the identity and price of the partnership interest to be sold were settled. Only then did petitioner cease to be entitled to his full partnership earnings. LeSage v. Commissioner, supra.
Since petitioner no longer contests the figure to be used as net partnership income, we find no error in the deficiency.
Decision will he entered for the respondent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
21 T.C. 733, 1954 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-commissioner-tax-1954.