Helvering v. Credit Alliance Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

88 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

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 155 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““1. Although a distribution in liquidation of 'earnings which accrued subsequently to February 28, 1913, does not constitute a dividend in the proper sense of the term, subsection (f) categorically declares that a liquidating distribution, to the extent it is composed of such earnings, shall, for- the purposes of computing the dividends paid credit ‘ be treated as a taxable dividend paid.’ Plainly the section intends that a distribution of such earnings shall be considered a dividend. Further it provides that the distributing corporation may use the amount in computing its credit for dividends paid. And, to put the matter beyond cavil, the section also says that the distribution shall be treated as the payment to the distributee óf a taxable dividend. * * % * ❖ “2. It is urged that the sweeping provision of (h) precludes the application of (f) in the circumstances disclosed, because (h) denies the credit unless the amount distributed is taxable to the distributee. By concession, the distribution here does not result in gain or loss to the parent company. The argument is in effect that (h) creates an exception to the rule formulated by (f). “As above said, each of the subsections of § 27 deals with a specific and particular topic. Subsection (f) deals with ‘distributions in liquidation’ while subsection (h) deals with ‘nontaxable distributions.’ If (f) applies in this case, (h) is left to cover a substantial field of other sorts. of distributions. We should, of course, read th”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Henricksen v. Braicks

2. “In view of what we have said as to the plain meaning of subsection (f), we think that no complexity or confusion is discoverable and that the regulation not only was contradictory of the plain terms of the subsection but attempted to add a supplementary legislative provision, which could only have been enacted by Congress. We hold, therefore, that the court below was right in refusing to give effect to the regulation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Philadelphia Electric Co. v. United States

3. ““Although a distribution in liquidation of earnings * * * does not constitute a dividend in the proper sense of the term, 1 subsection (f) 2 categorically declares that a liquidating distribution, to the extent it is composed of such earnings, shall, for the purposes of computing the dividends paid credit ‘be treated as a taxable dividend paid.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 161 F. Supp. 811 - Atlantic City Electric Company v. United States