Heringer v. Comm'r, 21 T.C. 607 (Tax Ct. 1954). · Go Syfert
Heringer v. Comm'r, 21 T.C. 607 (Tax Ct. 1954). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
27 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Heringer v. Commissioner (tax, 1954-01-26)
Treatment trajectory · 1954 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1954 1990 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) Heringer v. Commissioner (14×)
Tax Ct. · 1954 · confidence medium
The stockholdings of the two families after this issuance were as follows: No. of Shares Stephen F. Heringer 5,000 Mabel H.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." J.C. Shepherd v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 2000 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Heringer v. Commissioner, 235 F.2d 149, 151 (9th Cir. 1956) (transfers of farm lands to a family corporation of which donors were 40-percent owners represented gifts to other shareholders of 60 percent of the fair market value of the farm lands), modifying and remanding 21 T.C. 607 (1954); CTUW Georgia Ketteman Hollingsworth v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 91 (1986) (mother’s transfer to closely held corporation of property in exchange for note of lesser value represented gifts to the other five shareholders of five-sixths the difference in values of the property transferred and the note t…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." James S.\" (2×)
unknown court · Michael B.\" · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Heringer v. Commissioner, 235 F.2d 149 , 151 (9th Cir. 1956) (transfers of farm lands to a family corporation of which donors were 40-percent owners represented gifts to other shareholders of 60 percent of the fair market value of the farm lands), modifying and remanding 21 T.C. 607 (1954) ; CTUW Georgia Ketteman Hollingsworth v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 91 (1986) (mother's transfer to closely *102 held corporation of property in exchange for note of lesser value represented gifts to the other five shareholders of five-sixths the difference in values of the property transferred and the n…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Stephen F. Heringer, <sup id=\fnr_fnote1\"><a href=\"fn_fnote1\" id=\"\">1</a></sup>
v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue"
Docket Nos. 40018, 40019, 40020, 40021.
United States Tax Court.
Jan 26, 1954.
21 T.C. 607
R. E. H. Julien, Esq ., for the petitioners. T. M. Mather, Esq ., for the respondent.
Fossan, Opper.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

Lead Opinion

OPINION.

OppeR, Judge:

These circumstances are indistinguishable from Frank B. Thompson, 42 B. T. A. 121, which has now stood undisturbed by legislative, judicial, or administrative action for upward of 13 years. On the authority of that case, the real property transferred by petitioners to the corporation in which they and their children owned stock is a taxable gift to its full extent.

Robert H. Scanlon, 42 B. T. A. 997, which dealt with the transfer to a corporation wholly owned by the transferor is distinguishable from these proceedings on the same grounds as those on which that opinion itself distinguishes the Thompson case. And the transfer to their corporation by petitioners of valuable property is an entirely different thing from the renunciation of the undeclared dividend which occurred in Emily Coles Collins, 1 T. C. 605.

.From Frank B. Thompson, supra, it also follows that each petitioner is entitled to but one exclusion for gift tax purposes for each year.

Reviewed by the Court.

Decisions will be entered under Bule 50.

Dissent

Van FossaN, J.,

dissenting: Despite the statement in the opinion in Robert H. Scanlon, 42 B. T. A. 997, that it is distinguishable on its facts from Frank B. Thompson, 42 B. T. A. 121, I have never been able to perceive a valid distinction in principle between the two cases.

Accordingly, I cannot agree with the holding of the majority that the Thompson case governs here, and that the transfers were taxable to the donors as gifts, nor can I agree that each donor is entitled to but one exclusion.