Keen v. Commissioner

6 B.T.A. 275, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3570
CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals
DecidedFebruary 19, 1927
DocketDocket No. 8423.
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 6 B.T.A. 275 (Keen v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Keen v. Commissioner, 6 B.T.A. 275, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3570 (bta 1927).

Opinion

Smith :

This is a proceeding for the redetermination of a deficiency in income tax for the year 1922 in the amount of $369.78, only a part of which is in controversy. The petitioner alleges error on the part of the respondent in refusing to consider the tax paid by the petitioner to the French Government, under the French income tax laws, •upon an amount fixed at seven times the rental value of the residence of the petitioner, as such a tax as may be credited against the taxpayer’s Federal income tax under the provisions of section 222 of the Revenue Act of 1921. The findings are based on the admitted allegations in the petition and answer.

FINDINGS OF FACT.

The petitioner is an American citizen representing in Europe the Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co., of Milwaukee, Wis., and as such European representative he resided in France and was liable in 1922 to the taxation laws of France.

He paid for the year 1922 to the French Government, under its income tax laws, as income tax, a sum amounting to $342.62, calcu[276]*276lated upon an amount fixed at seven times the rental value of his residence.

In submitting his Federal income-tax return for 1922, the petitioner claimed a credit against his Federal income tax of $342.62 paid for that year to the French Government as indicated above. The Commissioner has disallowed the credit on the ground that the tax paid to the French Government was not an income tax within the purview of section 222 of the Revenue Act of 1921.

Judgment will he entered for the petitioner on 15 days' notice, under Rule 50.

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

Related

F. W. Woolworth Co. v. United States
15 F. Supp. 679 (S.D. New York, 1936)
Keen v. Commissioner
15 B.T.A. 1243 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 B.T.A. 275, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3570, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keen-v-commissioner-bta-1927.