Johnson v. Comm'r

30 T.C. 675, 1958 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 153, 118 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 42
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJune 24, 1958
DocketDocket No. 60342
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 30 T.C. 675 (Johnson v. Comm'r) 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
Johnson v. Comm'r, 30 T.C. 675, 1958 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 153, 118 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 42 (tax 1958).

Opinion

Fisher, Judge:

Respondent determined income'tax deficiencies and additions to tax as follows:

[[Image here]]

The principal issue before the Court is whether certain payments received by petitioner Herbert C. Johnson in connection with the transfer of a patent to a corporation of which he owned all of the common stock, and his immediate family owned all the preferred stock, are taxable as ordinary income or as long-term capital gains. Edna A. Johnson is Herbert’s wife and is also a petitioner because they filed joint returns for the years in question.

FINDINGS OP PACT.

Some of the facts have been stipulated and. are incorporated herein by reference.

Petitioners Herbert C. and Edna A. Johnson are residents of Wil-mette, Illinois. They filed joint Federal income tax returns as follows:

Year Date filed Place filed
1951_Mar. 14, 1952 Collector of internal revenue, 1st district, Illinois
1952_Mar. 24, 1953 District director of internal revenue, Chicago, Illinois.
1953-Mar. 15, 1954 District director of internal revenue, Chicago, Illinois.

Herbert C. Johnson (hereinafter referred to as petitioner) entered into the tool and diecasting design business in his individual capacity in 1923. Prior to that date he was employed as a draftsman and engineer by the Alemit Die Casting Co. From 1923 to December 17,1941, Johnson conducted his business under the name National Die Casting Company. Johnson’s business was primarily that of a job shop or custom manufacturer, that is, making diecasting and metal parts and products for other manufacturers either on a bid or contract basis. Johnson also manufactured and sold metal products of his own. One of the prime products manufactured and sold by Johnson was a single-stroke fruit juice extractor.

The manufacture of this juice extractor was based upon certain patents granted to J ohnson. The description of the device to which the patent relates is as follows:

[[Image here]]

In addition to the above, Johnson received other letters patent, all granted prior to December 17, 1941, which patents concern not only juice extractors but heaters, mirrors, and other such devices.

With the outbreak of World War II, Johnson found it difficult to obtain essential metals required in his business. He concluded that in order to stay in business he would have to engage in war products production. Johnson approached his attorney who advised him to incorporate his business inasmuch as the Government contracts he secured involved new and different work. On December 17, 1941, Johnson caused to be formed the National Die Casting Company, Inc., an Illinois corporation, to which he transferred his manufacturing business previously operated as an individual.

At the time National Die Casting Company, Inc. (hereinafter called National), was incorporated, Johnson transferred all of his manufacturing assets to the corporation except the letters patent referred to above and certain real estate.

The reason that J ohnson did not, at that time, transfer the patents and realty to the corporation was because he did not wish to subject these assets to the potential risk of National’s obligations arising out ■ of its activities in war work. J ohnson wished to assure himself of the opportunity, if he so chose, to exploit the patents in his individual capacity at the termination of the war period.

After experiencing initial difficulty in retooling, National manufactured, under Government contracts, material for the war effort from the time of its incorporation until the latter part of 1945. The corporation was subject to renegotiation of its Government contracts. During this period National did manufacture and sell to the Navy fruit juice extractors covered by the above-listed patents. These sales, however, were small in quantity and their production was not continuous but was sporadic.

Johnson did not receive any royalties from the manufacture or sale of the fruit juice extractors to the Navy by National. He .never asked for any compensation nor did be enter into any oral or written agreement with respect to his right to compensation for the use of the letters patent by National.

The termination or cutoff date of National’s war work came in the latter part of 1945. National was considering several products for civilian use at that time. It had developed an automatic record changer that could be applied to radio sets and would change intermixed 10- and 12-inch records. It planned to manufacture these record changers after the war but could not get parts. National decided to concentrate on the production of fruit juice extractors because of the few parts required, and the manufacturing know-how which it already possessed. This product permitted it to reconvert to civilian production quickly and to capitalize on existing civilian demand.

Johnson gratuitously permitted National to use his patents in the manufacture of these j uice extractors. Such gratuitous permission was given by Johnson to National on a temporary basis.

Johnson temporarily permitted National to manufacture these fruit juice extractors under his six patents until National was through the period of contract renegotiation with the Government.

After the period of contract renegotiation, Johnson decided to continue to operate National as a corporation and not to go back into business as an individual. He consulted an attorney concerning the sale to National of the patents held in his name. He was advised that only those patents that he owned prior to the incorporation of National could be sold. The other patents which had been granted Johnson subsequent to National’s incorporation could not be sold as National, in the opinion of Johnson’s attorney, had “shop rights” in those patents.

On November 17, 1947, Johnson entered into a written agreement with National regarding the six aforementioned fruit juice extractor patents. The agreement is as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. This agreement entered into November 17,1947, as of the 1st day of October, 1947, by and between HERBERT O. JOHNSON, of Wilmette, Illinois (hereinafter called JOHNSON), and NATIONAL DIE CASTING COMPANY, a corporation of Illinois, having its principal place of business at Lincolnwood, Illinois (hereinafter called NATIONAL).
witnesseth: :
2. Whereas, JOHSON [sic] is the owner of the entire right, title and interest in and to the following United States Letters Patent:
[[Image here]]
3. Whereas, NATIONAL desires to purchase said patents and JOHNSON is willing to sell said patents to NATIONAL:
4. Now, Therefore, in consideration of these premises, and of the mutual convenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, it is hereby covenanted and agreed by and between parties hereto as follows:

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

Related

Taylor v. Commissioner
1970 T.C. Memo. 325 (U.S. Tax Court, 1970)
Arutunoff v. Commissioner
1963 T.C. Memo. 192 (U.S. Tax Court, 1963)
Nutt v. Commissioner
39 T.C. 231 (U.S. Tax Court, 1962)
Century Tank Mfg. Co. v. Commissioner
1959 T.C. Memo. 95 (U.S. Tax Court, 1959)
Best Lock Corp. v. Commissioner
31 T.C. 1217 (U.S. Tax Court, 1959)
Johnson v. Comm'r
30 T.C. 675 (U.S. Tax Court, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
30 T.C. 675, 1958 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 153, 118 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-commr-tax-1958.