(a) Taxable years ending before January 1, 1971. For taxable years ending before January 1, 1971, the tax imposed by section 1 (whether by subsection (a) or subsection (b) thereof) shall not exceed 87 percent of the taxable income for the taxable year. For purposes of determining this limitation the tax under section 1 (a) or (b) and the tax at the 87-percent rate shall each be computed before the allowance of any credits against the tax. Where the alternative tax on capital gains is imposed under section 1201(b), the 87-percent limitation shall apply only to the partial tax computed on the taxable income reduced by 50 percent of the excess of net long-term capital gains over net short-term capital losses. Where, for purposes of computations under the income averaging provisions, section 1201(b) is treated as imposing the alternative tax on capital gains computed under section 1304(e)(2), the 87-percent limitation shall apply only to the tax equal to the tax imposed by section 1, reduced by the amount of the tax imposed by section 1 which is attributable to capital gain net income for the computation year.
(b) Taxable years beginning after December 31, 1970. If, for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1970, an individual has earned taxable income which exceeds his taxable income as defined by section 1348, the tax imposed by section 1, as amended by the Tax Reform Act of 1969, shall not exceed the sum computed under the provisions of section 1348. For imposition of minimum tax for tax preferences see sections 56 through 58.
[T.D. 7117, 36 FR 9397, May 25, 1971]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases, 1963–1975 · leading case:
Teeling v. Comm'r, 42 T.C. 671 (Tax Ct. 1964).
Teeling v. Comm'r, 42 T.C. 671 (Tax Ct. 1964).
· cites it 6× “1-2(c)(1) of respondent's Income Tax Regulations provides that in order for a taxpayer to qualify as head of a household under section 1(b)(2)(A) as maintaining a household which constitutes for the taxable year the principal place of abode as a member thereof of certain…”
Smith v. Comm'r, 40 T.C. 591 (Tax Ct. 1963).
· cites it 4× “Respondent's regulation ( sec. 1.1-2(c)(1), Income Tax Regs.”
Williams v. Comm'r, 53 T.C. 58 (Tax Ct. 1969).
· cites it 2× “With reference to dependents other than parents, the regulations state: It is not sufficient that the taxpayer maintain the household without being its occupant.”
Ruff v. Comm'r, 52 T.C. 576 (Tax Ct. 1969).
· cites it 2× “It is the respondent's position that since during the taxable year the petitioner did not have legal custody of the child and the child's actual residence was apart from the petitioner, the petitioner's household was not the child's principal place of abode and that therefore…”
Blair v. Comm'r, 63 T.C. 214 (Tax Ct. 1974).
· cites it 2× “1-2(c)(1) of the Income Tax Regulations provided in part: The taxpayer and such other person will be considered as occupying the household for such entire taxable year notwithstanding temporary *34 absences from the household due to special circumstances.”
John C. Muse v. United States, 434 F.2d 349 (4th Cir. 1970).
“” The applicable regulation, Treasury Regulations on Income Tax, 1954 Code, 26 C.F.R., § 1.1-2 is set out in the margin.”
Browne v. Comm'r, 24 T.C.M. 874 (Tax Ct. 1965).
· cites it 4× “Although it is admitted that petitioner's daughter did not reside in his home during 1959, he argues that the absence of his daughter from his household was a temporary one because of the special circumstances of her studies at Howard University, and that this particular…”
Petlow v. Comm'r, 34 T.C.M. 51 (Tax Ct. 1975).
· cites it 4× “In addition, the cost of maintaining a household shall not include any amount which represents the value of services rendered in the household by the taxpayer or by a person qualifying the taxpayer as a head of a household.”
Est. of Louise K. Adams v. Comm'r, 26 T.C.M. 1098 (Tax Ct. 1967).
· cites it 4× “(1) In order for the taxpayer to be considered a head of a household by reason of any individual described in subparagraph (A) of section 1(b)(2), the household *64 must actually constitute the home of the taxpayer for his taxable year.”
Marlowe v. Comm'r, 26 T.C.M. 80 (Tax Ct. 1967).
· cites it 2× “Indeed, the record herein is devoid of evidence as to where petitioner lived during the last half of 1963 or whether his actual place of residence might have appropriately been considered a home or a household.”
Biolchin v. Comm'r, 28 T.C.M. 1041 (Tax Ct. 1969).
· cites it 2× “Ownership and maintenance is not per se sufficient; there must be physical occupancy by the taxpayer to meet the requirement of a "home." W. E. Grace, 51 T.C. 685 (1969) , on appeal (C.”
Leeds v. Comm'r, 33 T.C.M. 551 (Tax Ct. 1974).
· cites it 2× “" The question in dispute is whether the petitioner maintained as a home a household that constitutes the principal place of abode of petitioner's son.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.