Commissioner v. McWilliams’s Empirical Analysis
158 F.2d 637 · 1946
Citation profile
7 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1984
7 federal appellate ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on Gregory v. Helvering · Helvering v. Clifford · National Labor Relations Board v. Hearst Publications, Inc. · Commissioner v. Tower · Dobson v. Commissioner
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * The difficulty of determining. the finality of an intra-family transfer was one with which the courts wrestled under the pre-1934 law, and which Congress undoubtedly meant to overcome by enacting the provisions of § 24(b). * * * * * “* * * Section 24(b) states an absolute prohibition — not a pre sumption — against the allowance of losses on any sales between the members of certain designated groups. The one common .characteristic of these groups is that their members, although distinct legal entities, generally have a near-identity of economic interests. It is a fair inference that even legally genuine intragroup transfers were not thought to result, usually, in economically genuine realizations of loss, and accordingly that Congress did not. deem them to be appropriate occasions for the allowance of deductions. “The pertinent legislative history lends support to this inference. The Congressional Committees, in reporting the provisions enacted in 1934, merely stated that ‘the practice of creating losses through transactions between members of a family and close corporations has been frequently utilized for avoiding the income tax,’ and that these provisions were proposed to ‘deny losses to be taken in the case of [such] sales’ and ‘to close this loophole of tax avoidance.’ Similar language was used in reporting the 1937 provisions. Chairman Doughton of the Ways and Means Committee, in explaining the 1937 provisions to the House, spoke of ‘the artificial taking and est”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.