26 U.S.C. § 1054

Certain stock of Federal National Mortgage Association

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 26 CasesGoogle Scholar

In the case of a share of stock issued pursuant to section 303(c) of the Federal National Mortgage Association Charter Act (12 U.S.C., sec. 1718), the basis of such share in the hands of the initial holder shall be an amount equal to the capital contributions evidenced by such share reduced by the amount (if any) required by section 162(d) to be treated (with respect to such share) as ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred in carrying on a trade or business.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1930–1935 · leading case: Hughson v. United States, 59 F.2d 17 (9th Cir. 1932).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hughson v. United States, 59 F.2d 17 (9th Cir. 1932). · cites it 2× “298 (26 USCA § 1054 and note). The same rule applies to jeopardy assessments such as these made under section 276 (a) (2) and section 274 (d) of the Revenue Act of 1924; (26 USCA § 1056 (a) (2), and § 1051 note); and section 279 (a) of the Act (26 USCA § 1063 note) provides for…”

Maryland Cas. Co. v. United States, 76 F.2d 626 (5th Cir. 1935). “The bond appears to be on a form appropriate to the delay of deficiency assessments under section 274 (g) of the Revenue Act of 1924, and section 274 (k) of the Revenue Act of 1926 (26 USCA § 1054 and note). But a blank in the bond as to the statute referred to as authority…”

Miami Valley Fruit Co. v. United States, 45 F.2d 303 (5th Cir. 1930). · cites it 2× “Although no special statute is referred to in the bond, there is a general reference to the laws and regulations, and it was evidently given and accepted under the provisions of section 274(g) of the Revenue Act of 1924 (26 USCA § 1054). True the Revenue Act of 1926 was in…”

Riverside & Dan River Cotton Mills, Inc. v. United States, 11 F. Supp. 134 (Ct. Cl. 1935). “” Section 277 (a) (3) of the 1926 Act, 26 USCA § 1054 (a) (3), provides a five-year limitation period for the assessment and collection of taxes for the year 1918.”

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.