Advance Machinery Exchange, Inc. v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis
196 F.2d 1006 · 1952
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably Kraft Foods Co. v. Commissioner (1956), Commissioner v. Chelsea Products, Inc. (1952)
31 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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.
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 45
Relies on Helvering v. Clifford · Helvering v. Horst · Lucas v. Earl · Higgins v. Smith · Oklahoma v. Texas
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In any case of two or more organizations, trades, or businesses (whether or not incorporated, whether or not organized in the United States, and whether or not affiliated) owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the same interests, the Commissioner is authorized to distribute, apportion, or allocate gross income, deductions, credits, or allowances between or among such organizations, trades, or businesses, if he determines that such distribution, apportionment, or allocation is necessary in order to prevent evasion of taxes or clearly to reflect the income of any of such organizations, trades, or businesses.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * the unsoundness of that [argument] of the petitioner is illustrated by the fact that it would exclude from the `policing' provisions of § 45 [now § 482] the most flagrant evasion by arbitrary shifting of income. It would let the Commissioner reallocate the income of these separate entities, to reflect the income of each correctly, if the amount involved, however great, did not equal their total combined income but he could not apply § 45 at all if the taxpayers succeeded in constructing a situation where, in order to prevent tax evasion or properly to reflect income, it were necessary to attribute all of the income of the separate entities to one of them, as was done here. Thus tax evasion could be so complete as to make itself invulnerable, a proposition whose statement discloses its fallacy.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is essentially one of fact and * * * must be affirmed if supported by substantial evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Local Finance Corporation, Local Finance Corporation of South Marion, Local Finance Corporation of Elkhart, Local Finance Corporation of Gas City, Local Finance Corporation of Rushville, Local Finance Corporation of Danville, Local Finance, Inc., Local Finance Co., Inc. Of Gary, Local Finance Company, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Guardian Agency, Inc., Beneficial Insurance Agency, Inc. · Philipp Brothers Chemicals, Inc. (n.y.) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Philipp Brothers Chemicals Trans-America Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Philipp Brothers Chemicals Pan-American Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Phibro International Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Philipp Brothers Chemicals International Co., Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Philipp Brothers Chemicals Export Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
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.