Joseph Tancredi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Charles Lisi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Second Circuit

Joseph Tancredi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Charles Lisi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

218 F.2d 584, 46 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1534, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5255

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJanuary 7, 1955

Docket2, 3, Dockets 22282, 22283

StatusPublished

This text of 218 F.2d 584 (Joseph Tancredi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Charles Lisi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Joseph Tancredi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Charles Lisi v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 218 F.2d 584, 46 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1534, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5255 (2d Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Tancredi and Lisi were engaged in business as partners. Each purported to form a subpartnership with members of his family pursuant to which they would have a half interest in his interest in the Tancredi and Lisi partnership. The Tax Court held that portions of the net income of the partnership in 1944 which were reported as distributed to the wife and four children of Tan-credi and to the wife and four children of Lisi constituted income to the respective heads of the two families. After a careful review of the evidence, Judge Hill found in his memorandum opinion that “the wives and children of these two families entered into no partnership agreements with petitioners until October 1944,” and that “In October 1944 * * * these family subpartner-ships were undertaken as the most expedient device for reducing the higher taxes which would result from the unprecedented business success in 1944. In actuality no change occurred in the economic relationship of the Tancredi or Lisi families after the formation of the subpartnerships.” These findings are based in part on disbelief of the oral testimony of witnesses. We cannot say they are clearly erroneous; in fact, they are well supported by the mass of contradictions both in the so-called partnership agreements and the book entries. Outstanding is the fact that the profits increased from about $5,300 in 1943 to over $113,000 in 1944, thus providing the best of motives for a tax evasion scheme. In this setting the dearth of services rendered by the alleged subpartners and the lack of capital contribution on their part are particularly significant. Hence there was clearly no error in the way Judge Hill applied the principles enunciated in Com *585 missioner of Internal Revenue v. Culbertson, 337 U.S. 733, 69 S.Ct. 1210, 93 L.Ed. 1659, upon which the taxpayers strongly rely.

The decisions are affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Tancredi and Lisi were engaged in business as partners. Each purported to form a subpartnership with members of his family pursuant to which they would have a half interest in his interest in the Tancredi and Lisi partnership. The Tax Court held that portions of the net income of the partnership in 1944 which were reported as distributed to the wife and four children of Tan-credi and to the wife and four children of Lisi constituted income to the respective heads of the two families. After a careful review of the evidence, Judge Hill found in his memorandum opinion that “the wives and children of these two families entered into no partnership agreements with petitioners until October 1944,” and that “In October 1944 * * * these family subpartner-ships were undertaken as the most expedient device for reducing the higher taxes which would result from the unprecedented business success in 1944. In actuality no change occurred in the economic relationship of the Tancredi or Lisi families after the formation of the subpartnerships.” These findings are based in part on disbelief of the oral testimony of witnesses. We cannot say they are clearly erroneous; in fact, they are well supported by the mass of contradictions both in the so-called partnership agreements and the book entries. Outstanding is the fact that the profits increased from about $5,300 in 1943 to over $113,000 in 1944, thus providing the best of motives for a tax evasion scheme. In this setting the dearth of services rendered by the alleged subpartners and the lack of capital contribution on their part are particularly significant. Hence there was clearly no error in the way Judge Hill applied the principles enunciated in Com *585 missioner of Internal Revenue v. Culbertson, 337 U.S. 733, 69 S.Ct. 1210, 93 L.Ed. 1659, upon which the taxpayers strongly rely.

The decisions are affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

218 F.2d 584, 46 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1534, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-tancredi-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-charles-lisi-v-ca2-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack