Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 509 F.3d 736 - Richardson v. Commissioner

Richardson v. Commissioner’s Empirical Analysis

509 F.3d 736 · 2007

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
2
states following
September 2022
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably 408 F. App'x 908 - New Phoenix Sunrise Corp. v. Commissioner (2010), Kosinski v. Commissioner (2008)

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

270200720102020decided

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. § 170 · 26 U.S.C. § 262 · 26 U.S.C. § 501 · 26 U.S.C. § 6013 · 26 U.S.C. § 6015 · 26 U.S.C. § 61 (Payment-in-Kind Tax Treatment Act of 1983) · 26 U.S.C. § 6663

Relies on Spies v. United States · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court Holding Co · Commissioner v. Tower · Zmuda v. Commissioner · Helvering v. Gregory

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

  1. “(A) a joint return has been made for a taxable year; (B) on such return there is an understatement of tax attributable to erroneous items of one individual filing the joint return; (C) the other individual filing the joint return establishes that in signing the return he or she did not know, and had no reason to know, that there was such understatement; (D) taking into account all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the other individual liable for the deficiency in tax for such taxable year attributable to such understatement; and (E) the other individual elects (in such form as the Secretary may prescribe) the benefits of this subsection not later than the date which is 2 years after the date the Secretary has begun collection activities with respect to the individual making the election.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “any conduct, the likely effect of which would be to mislead or conceal.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Because even the most patriotic citizens do not have a duty to increase [their] taxes, it is entirely legal and legitimate to minimize taxes through permissible means. But if a transaction or entity has no valid, non-tax business purpose, nominally uses another person or entity as a conduit through which to pass title, or br[ings] about no real change in the economic relation of the [taxpayers] to the income in question, the Commissioner has the authority to find that the transaction or entity lacks economic substance and disregard it for tax purposes.”
    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.