Shapiro v. Commissioner

2 B.T.A. 620, 1925 BTA LEXIS 2315
CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals
DecidedSeptember 28, 1925
DocketDocket Nos. 1695 and 1696.
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2 B.T.A. 620 (Shapiro 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
Shapiro v. Commissioner, 2 B.T.A. 620, 1925 BTA LEXIS 2315 (bta 1925).

Opinion

The taxpayers appeal from determinations of deficiencies for the calendar year 1919 as follows:

George Shapiro-1_$1, 544. 49
Joseph Shapiro- 1, 049. 23

By stipulation of counsel the appeals were consolidated. The deficiencies result from the action of the Commissioner in determining that the taxpayers realized a taxable profit upon the dissolution and liquidation of a corporation in which the taxpayers were stockholders.

FINDINGS OP FACT.

1. The taxpayers are individuals residing in Los Angeles, Calif.

2. In 1919 each of the taxpayers owned 12,500 shares, or one-half, •of the capital stock of the California Sanitary Canning Co., a corporation. This stock had been acquired at a cost to each of $9,584.

3. On December 31, 1919, the corporation was dissolved and the business was thereafter operated as a partnership, in which the taxpayers were equal partners, under the name of the California Sanitary Canning Co.

4. The entire assets of the corporation, of the value of $33,914.62, were taken over by the partnership.

5. The Commissioner computed the taxable profit realized by each taxpayer as follows:

One-half the value of the corporation's assets which were taken
over by the partnership-$16,957. 31
Cost of stock___ 9, 584. 00
Profit_ 7,373.31

DECISION.

The determinations of the Commissioner are approved. Appeal of E. C. Huffman, 1 B. T. A. 52.

ARttndell not participating.

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

Related

Woodard v. Commissioner
30 B.T.A. 1216 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1934)
Darrow v. Commissioner
8 B.T.A. 276 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1927)
Burge v. Commissioner
4 B.T.A. 732 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1926)
Shapiro v. Commissioner
2 B.T.A. 620 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 B.T.A. 620, 1925 BTA LEXIS 2315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shapiro-v-commissioner-bta-1925.