Pounds v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
372 F.2d 342 · 1967
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably Estate of Leavitt v. Commissioner (1988), Jacobson v. Commissioner (1990)
13 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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. § 61 (Payment-in-Kind Tax Treatment Act of 1983)
Relies on Corn Products Refining Company v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. P G Lake · Sweet v. United States · Hort v. Commissioner · Laskey Bros. of West Virginia, Inc. v. Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc.
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“But where the taxpayer has only a right to share in the profits that might be realized, that interest cannot be treated as a capital asset. The definition of a capital asset must be narrowly applied and its exclusions interpreted broadly in order to effectuate the congressional purpose underlying the capital gains provision. Capital gains treatment was intended to relieve the taxpayer from the excessive tax burden on gain resulting from a conversion of capital investment. [ 372 F.2d at 346 .]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is further agreed that at such time as this property is sold and the total investment has been recovered, including taxes and other expenses which may develop in the interim from its purchase date to the date of sale, such excess as develops to be net profit which shall (sic.) divided, first 25% of the actual net profits shall be remitted as appreciation and remuneration for your efforts in working out all of the details necessary in the consummation of this deal. [ 372 F.2d at 344 .]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We give weight to the fact that Pounds had no legal or equitable interest in the land; he had only a contingent right to share in future profits, if any, in return for personal services rendered. In these circumstances we must classify his 12% per cent share of the profits as ordinary income under Section 61(a). In any event the payment Pounds received would be ordinary income since there was no “sale or exchange” as required by Section 1222. [Id. at 348.] 6”
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.