26 U.S.C. § 1034
Repealed. Pub. L. 105–34, title III, § 312(b), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 839]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases, 1963–2006 · leading case: Carlos & Jacqueline Marcello v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Joseph, Jr. & Anastasia Marcello v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 380 F.2d 499 (5th Cir. 1967).
Carlos & Jacqueline Marcello v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Joseph, Jr. & Anastasia Marcello v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 380 F.2d 499 (5th Cir. 1967). “Section 1034(a) of the 1954 Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 1034 (a), provides that if within a year before or after the sale of a taxpayer’s residence, the taxpayer purchases and uses a new residence, the gain on the sale of the old residence to the extent of the cost of…”
United States v. Darusmont, 449 U.S. 292 (1981). “Because, however, appellee purchased a replacement residence in California, he was able, under § 1034 of the Code, 26 U. S. C. § 1034 , to defer recognition of that portion of the gain attributable to the unit of the Texas house that the Darusmonts had occupied.”
Vadas v. Vadas, 762 N.E.2d 1234 (Ind. 2002). “26 U.S.C. § 1034 (1994). James assured Rita that the refinancing would be completed before February 1998.”
Grapevine Imports, Ltd. v. United States, 71 Fed. Cl. 324 (Fed. Cl. 2006). “§§ 1314 (b), 6230(a)(3)(A); 26 U.S.C. § 1034© (1996). This same language also has been employed to extend limitations provisions in numerous tax transition provisions.”
Heidelberg v. Hammer, 577 F.2d 429 (7th Cir. 1978). “They contend that but for the supersedeas stay they would have been able to meet the requirements of 26 U.S.C. § 1034 6 and therefore would have avoided paying any tax on the capital gain in their 1974 income taxes.”
Nelson C. & Adele B. Elam v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 477 F.2d 1333 (6th Cir. 1973). “The contention is made by the taxpayers that the Tax Court misconstrued Section 1034 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 ( 26 U.S.C. § 1034 ) by not allowing a reinvestment deduction to the extent that the gain from a home sale was reinvested within 18 months in the…”
Curtis B. Perry Laura L. Perry v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 91 F.3d 82 (9th Cir. 1996). “3 Ill We hold that once a taxpayer leaves his marital home, permanently and with no intention to return, pursuant to a divorce settlement which gives the other spouse exclusive occupancy and which does not mandate that the house immediately be sold, the taxpayer cannot avail…”
In Re Stallman, 198 B.R. 491 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1996). “See 26 U.S.C. § 1034 . . The Court draws this assumption based on Mr.”
United States v. Edwin L. Sheahan & Deborah M. Sheahan, 323 F.2d 383 (5th Cir. 1963). “Section 1034 ( 26 U.S.C.A. § 1034 ) provides: 1 “(a) Nonrecognition of gain.”
Keller v. Keller, 877 S.W.2d 192 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994). “2d Federal Taxation § 4187 (1990); see also 26 U.S.C.S. § 1034 (e). In the case before us, wife’s postponed gain is not reported on Federal Income Tax Form 1040, but is listed on Form 2119 pertaining to the sale of the marital home.”
Schmidt v. United States, 5 Cl. Ct. 24 (Ct. Cl. 1984). “26 U.S.C. § 1034 (a). The IRS determined that plaintiff had a recognizable net capital gain of $5,444.”
Stuart M. Hughes & Genevieve O. Hughes v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 450 F.2d 980 (4th Cir. 1971). “26 U.S.C.A. § 1034 : (a) Nonrecognition of gain.”
— 26 U.S.C. § 1034(f) — 1 case
Carlos & Jacqueline Marcello v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Joseph, Jr. & Anastasia Marcello v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 380 F.2d 499 (5th Cir. 1967). “Section 1034(a) of the 1954 Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 1034 (a), provides that if within a year before or after the sale of a taxpayer’s residence, the taxpayer purchases and uses a new residence, the gain on the sale of the old residence to the extent of the cost of…”
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.