26 U.S.C. § 133

Repealed. Pub. L. 104–188, title I, § 1602(a), Aug. 20, 1996, 110 Stat. 1833]

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

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1992–1994 · leading case: United States v. Carlton, 512 U.S. 26 (1994).
United States v. Carlton, 512 U.S. 26 (1994). · cites it 2× “, 26 U. S. C. § 133 (partial income tax exclusion for interest paid to banks on ESOP loans); 26 U.”
Jerry W. Carlton, of the Will of Willametta K. Day v. United States, 972 F.2d 1051 (9th Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “See 26 U.S.C. § 133 . Taxpayers who sell shares to an ESOP may defer for tax purposes the recognition of *1061 any capital gain on such sale.”
Reich v. Valley Nat'l Bank of Arizona, 837 F. Supp. 1259 (S.D.N.Y. 1993). “The ESOP was created solely to “significantly reduce the after tax cost of the leveraged buyout” pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 133 , which provides a tax break to the lending institution involved in a financing such as the Kroy LBO which was then passed on to Kroy in the form of lower…”
Martin v. Feilen, 965 F.2d 660 (8th Cir. 1992). “For example, the tax Code exempts 50% of a qualified lender’s interest income from loans made to finance an ESOP’s acquisition of employer stock, 26 U.S.C. § 133 . The Code also *665 permits an employer to deduct dividends paid on stock held by an ESOP, 26 U.”
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.