Higgins v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
308 U.S. 473 · 1940
Citation profile
723 federal appellate · 45 district · 104 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,776 later decisions (56 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2023 · most notably Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court Holding Co (1945), Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Culbertson (1949)
723 federal appellate · 45 district · 104 state decisions — followed in 23 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
reviewedSmith v. Higgins (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Gregory v. Helvering · Lucas v. Earl · Corliss v. Bowers · Sanford's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Cited together with Gregory v. Helvering · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court Holding Co · Moline Properties, Inc. v. Commissioner · Griffiths v. Helvering · Helvering v. Clifford
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 1,776 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The taxpayer cites Burnet v. Commonwealth Improvement Co., [ 287 U.S. 415 , 53 S.Ct. 198 , 77 L.Ed. 399 ], as a precedent for treating the taxpayer and his solely owned corporation as separate entities. In that case the corporation sold stock to the sole stockholder, the Estate of P. A. B. Widener. The transaction showed a book profit and the corporation sought a ruling that a sale to its sole stockholder could not result in a taxable profit. This Court concluded otherwise and held the identity of corporation and taxpayer distinct for purposes of taxation. In the Commonwealth Improvement Company case, the taxpayer, for reasons satisfactory to itself voluntarily had chosen to employ the corporation in its operations. A taxpayer is free to adopt such organization for his affairs as he may choose and having elected to do some business as a corporation, he must accept the tax disadvantages. “On the other hand, the Government may not be required to acquiesce in the taxpayer’s election of that form for doing business which is most advantageous to him. The Government may look at actualities and upon determination that the form employed for doing business or carrying out the challenged tax event is unreal or a sham may sustain or disregard the effect of the fiction as best serves the purposes of the tax statute. To hold otherwise would permit the schemes of taxpayers to supersede legislation in the determination of the time and manner of taxation. It is command of income and its ben”
60 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“no loss in the statutory sense could occur upon a sale by a taxpayer to * * * [a wholly owned corporation]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a transfer by * * * [the taxpayer's] left hand, being his individual hand, into his right hand, being his corporate hand, so that in truth and fact there was no transfer at all.”
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.