Jones v. Commissioner

20 B.T.A. 391, 1930 BTA LEXIS 2142
United States Board of Tax Appeals·Decided July 29, 1930·No. Docket No. 29948.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION.

Seawell :

The case is submitted on the pleadings and our findings of fact show that the sole question for our decision is one of law, which is simply whether it was error for the Commissioner in computing the estate tax to include in the gross estate of the decedent the entire value of the community property.

The issue here is controlled by Alois Frank Baumgartner et al., Executors, 17 B. T. A. 289; Katharina Richter, Executrix, 16 B. T. A. 936; Estate of Isidor Rosenberg, 14 B. T. A. 1340; Griffith Hen[392]*392shaw, Executor, 12 B. T. A. 1441; affd., 31 Fed. (2d) 946; certiorari denied, 280 U. S. 43A); Mary Brent, Executrix, 6 B. T. A. 143; and Talcott v. United States, 23 Fed. (2d) 897.

Judgment will be entered for the respondent.

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

Jones v. Commissioner, 20 B.T.A. 391, 1930 BTA LEXIS 2142 (bta 1930).

20 B.T.A. 391 (Jones v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. Commissioner
20 B.T.A. 391 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1930)