12 U.S.C. § 931
Repealed. Pub. L. 92–181, title V, § 5.26(a), Dec. 10, 1971, 85 Stat. 624
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases, 1934–1983 · leading case: First Agricultural National Bank of Berkshire County v. State Tax Commission
First Agricultural National Bank of Berkshire County v. State Tax Commission (1968)
“380 (1916), 12 U. S. C. § 931 ; many other federal banking institutions; [11] the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, 47 Stat.”
First Agricultural National Bank of Berkshire County v. State Tax Commission (1967)
“§ 531 (1964) (Federal reserve banks); 12 U.S.C. § 931 (1964) (Federal land banks); 12 U.”
Igleheart v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1935)
“360 [12 USCA § 931 et seq.]) provides that such bonds and the income derived therefrom “shall be exempt from Federal, State, municipal, and local taxation.”
Rohr Aircraft Corp. v. County of San Diego (1960)
“380 , 12 U. S. C. §§ 931 , 933 (Federal Land Banks); 42 Stat.”
Federal Land Bank of Wichita v. Board of County Commissioners (1961)
“4 Petitioner sought an injunction against collection of the personal property tax in the state court, claiming an exemption under 12 U. S. C. § 931 , 5 which provides, in part, that federal land banks “shall be exempt from .”
Federal Land Bank of Houston v. State (1958)
“In support thereof they proved the Bank owned promissory notes secured by deed of trust liens on real estate situated in Dallam County of an approximate total unpaid balance of an $400,000, of which approximately $39,000 constituted Vendor's Lien notes additionally secured by…”
Knox National Farm Loan Ass'n v. Phillips (1937)
“To this we add, however, that a national farm loan association is an instrumentality of the federal government; that the time and manner of liquidation are governed by the federal statute; and that jurisdiction does not reside in the tribunals of a state to wind up the business…”
County of St. Louis v. Federal Land Bank of St. Paul (1983)
“12 U.S.C.A. §§ 931 , 933 (West 1969); Federal Farm Loan Act of 1916, ch.”
Stern Bros. & Co. v. Commissioner (1940)
“The sole question presented is whether the profits in suit were nontaxable because of Section 26 of the Farm Loan Act, which, so far as pertinent, provided that bonds issued under the Act “shall be deemed and held to be instrumentalities of the Government of the United States,…”
Stewart v. United States (1939)
“360 , 380, 12 U.S.C.A. § 931 . As heretofore noted, the bonds in question were issued under the provisions of the Federal Farm Loan Act of 1916, section 26 of which reads in part as follows: “That every Federal land bank and every national farm loan association, including the…”
United States v. Knapp (1959)
“703 , 2 as follows : “Petitioner suggests that the Crosland case may be distinguished; that the Alabama tax was imposed on the lender, whereas the Maryland tax is on the privilege of recording the instrument and the statute is silent as to the one who shall pay the tax; also…”
Stewart v. United States (1938)
“The bonds were issued under the Federal Farm Loan Act of 1916, 12 USC § 931 , 12 U.S.C.A. § 931 , which, among other matters, provides that bonds issued by such banks “shall be deemed and held to be instrumentalities of the Government of the United States, and as such they and…”
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.