Helvering v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.’s Empirical Analysis
306 U.S. 110 · 1939
Citation profile
332 federal appellate · 35 district · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 718 later decisions (61 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2014 · most notably National Labor Relations Board v. Bell Aerospace Co. (1974), Automobile Club of Mich. v. Commissioner (1957)
332 federal appellate · 35 district · 41 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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
reviewedR. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Commissioner (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Morrissey v. Commissioner · First Chrold Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · Simmons & Hammond Mfg. Co. v. Commissioner · Farmers Deposit Nat'l Bank 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 718 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * As the petitioner points out, Congress has, in the Revenue Acts of 1936 and 1938, retained Section 22 (a) of the 1928 Act in haec verha. From this it is argued,that Congress has approved the amended regulation. It may be that by the passage of the Revenue Act of 1936 the Treasury was authorized thereafter to apply the regulation in its amended form. But we have no occasion to decide this question, since we are of opinion that the reenactment of the section, without more, does not amount to sanction of retroactive enforcement of the amendment, in the teeth of the former regulation which received Congressional approval, by the passage of successive Revenue Acts including that of 1928.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Article 66 of Treasury Regulations 74, promulgated under the Act of 1928, so far as material, is: `If * * * the corporation purchases any of its stock and holds it as treasury stock, the sale of such stock will be considered a capital transaction and the proceeds of such sale will be treated as capital and will not constitute income of the corporation. A corporation realizes no gain or loss from the purchase or sale of its own stock.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Retroactivity of regulations or rulings. The Secretary, or the Commissioner with the approval of the Secretary, may prescribe the extent, if any, to which any ruling, regulation, or Treasury Decision, relating to the internal revenue laws, shall be applied without retroactive effect.” (Italics added.)”
2 later decisions 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.