Hofferbert v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis
200 F.2d 648 · 1952
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 107 · 26 U.S.C. § 12 · 26 U.S.C. § 51
Relies on Hormel v. Helvering · Burnet v. Commonwealth Improvement Co. · Minnich v. Gardner · Lindstrom v. Commissioner · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Elder W. Marshall, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Elder W. Marshall and Bessie I. Marshall
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) Personal services. If at least 80 per centum of the total compensation for personal services covering a period of thirty-six calendar months or more (from the beginning to the completion of such services) is received or accrued in one taxable year by an individual or a partnership, the tax attributable to any part thereof which is included in the gross income of any individual shall not be greater than the aggregate of the taxes attributable to such part had it been included in the gross income of such individual ratably over that part of the period which precedes the date of such receipt or accrual.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““(d) Tax in case of joint return. In the case of a joint return of husband and wife under section 51(b), the combined normal tax and surtax under section 11 and subsection (b) of this section shall be twice the combined normal tax and surtax that would be determined if the net income and the applicable credits against net income provided by section 25 were reduced by one-half.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““It is objected that the effect of applying the split of income allowed by the statute along with the provisions of section 107(a) is to-.arrive at a tax less than that which would have been paid if the income had been received in the .years in which it was earned and tax paid on it at. that time, when no splitting of income was allowed by law. This is true; but the answer is that the income was received when splitting was permitted, and section 107(a) must be applied to it as split. That section does not require that the income be taxed in the year when earned but merely provides a formula for determining .the tax on long term compensation in the year when it is received and taxable. Treasury Regulation 111, sec. 29.-107-1; Elder W. Marshall, 14 T.C. 90 , affirmed Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Marshall, 3 Cir., 185 F.2d 674 ; Federico Stallforth, 6 T.C. 140 , 158. Under the authority of the act of 1948, the joint return is applicable to all income received by the taxpayers in that year. One-half of that income, including the long term compensation, is attributable under the statute to each spouse and. the wife has just as much right to the benefits of section 107(a) as .the husband. . -The contention of the government would nullify the effect of the act of 1948 with respect to income representing long term compensation; and we find nothing in the language, in the history or in the reason and spirit of the act which would justify such a result.” (Italics supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.