Shoemaker v. Commissioner

16 B.T.A. 1145, 1929 BTA LEXIS 2441
CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals
DecidedJune 25, 1929
DocketDocket Nos. 25639, 25640, 25886-25889.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 16 B.T.A. 1145 (Shoemaker 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
Shoemaker v. Commissioner, 16 B.T.A. 1145, 1929 BTA LEXIS 2441 (bta 1929).

Opinion

[1150]*1150OBINION.

LaNsdoN:

The questions presented herein were considered and disposed of in Elmer J. Keitel, 15 B. T. A. 903, where we held that a terminable interest in property purchased in consideration of a promise to pay an annuity to the grantor represented a capital investment which should be exhausted over the life of the estate so acquired. In that case there was no proof of the value of the estate acquired and the deduction to which petitioner was entitled could not be determined.

In the instant case the contract of December 8, 1921, provided for the absolute sale and transfer by Charlotte S. Holmes of her life interest in the estate of her husband, which we have found to have had a value of at least $92,500, in consideration of a promise to pay her an annuity of $25,000,

[1151]*1151We consider the Keitel case, supra, controlling here and, in conformity with our opinion in that case, the petitioner, Flora H. Shoemaker, is entitled to deduct $25,000 for exhaustion of the terminable - estate acquired, in computing her taxable income for 1922. A like amount should be deducted in computing the distributable partnership net income for 1923. Cf. Caroline T. Kissel, 15 B. T. A. 705.

Decision will Toe entered under Rule 50.

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

Related

Shoemaker v. Commissioner
16 B.T.A. 1145 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16 B.T.A. 1145, 1929 BTA LEXIS 2441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shoemaker-v-commissioner-bta-1929.