26 U.S.C. § 2
INCOME TAX TREATMENT OF AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES RECEIVED UNDER A 1983 PAYMENT-IN-KIND PROGRAM.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1934–2026 · leading case: United States v. Lalonde, 509 F.3d 750 (6th Cir. 2007).
United States v. Lalonde, 509 F.3d 750 (6th Cir. 2007). “§ 2 and § 1956, and three counts of income tax evasion, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 2 and § 7201. On January 16, 2003, Lalonde was arraigned on the indictment before a federal magistrate judge.”
Finkel v. Polichuk (In re Polichuk), 506 B.R. 405 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2014). “” 26 U.S.C. § 2 (b)(1). . Even if Andrew proves at trial that the Debtor and Marina were married at the time of the transfer of entireties property, the Trustee may still have a viable claim if the Debtor and Marina had any joint creditors at the time of the transfer sought to…”
Bartholomew v. Dist. of Columbia Off. of Tax & Revenue, 78 A.3d 309 (D.C. 2013). “04(22) (2001) adopts the definition of “head of household” from the federal tax code, 26 U.S.C. § 2 (b), which provides that: an individual shall be considered a head of a household if, and only if, such individual is not married at the close of his taxable year, is not a…”
In re the Matter of: Birch Benjamin Hansen v. Suzanne Christine Todnem, 891 N.W.2d 51 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017). “See 26 U.S.C. §§ 2 (b)(1) (2012), 151(a)-(c).”
Johnson v. United States, 422 F. Supp. 958 (N.D. Ind. 1976). “26 U.S.C. § 2 (b) provides (emphasis supplied): Deünition of head of household.”
United States v. Venie, 691 F. Supp. 834 (M.D. Penn. 1988). “We find it sufficient to enjoin him from utilizing the “Head of Household” status in a manner contradictory to the express language of 26 U.S.C. § 2 and from listing any amount of child care expenses different from that amount the taxpayer authorizes him to list.”
Linda M. Sherbo v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 255 F.3d 650 (8th Cir. 2001). “First, Linda argues that Steve could not satisfy the residence test in § 32(e)(3)(A)(ii) as a matter of law because, even if he lived with the children in Linda’s home in 1995 and 1996, the residence test also requires that the eligible individual be the head of household, as…”
Est. of Neilson, 371 P.2d 745 (Cal. 1962). “” 2 Joint returns filed in 1948 and subsequent years are no evidence of transmutation. Since' that year husbands and wives in all states have been permitted to file joint returns and split their income whether the income reported is separate or community.”
Collins v. Glenwood Mgmt. Corp., 25 A.D.3d 447 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006). “” This filing status applies “if, and only if, such individual is not married at the close of his taxable year” ( 26 USC § 2 [b] [1]). The affidavit of *450 Mrs.”
City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court of Los Angeles Cnty., 234 Cal. App. 4th 275 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). “) However, we note that Wade’s theory that a sole occupant can be the head of household “of a household of one person” cannot be reconciled with the definition of “head of household” as set forth in the Internal Revenue Code ( 26 U.S.C. § 2 (b)) and its California counterpart.”
Moran v. Peake, 525 F.3d 1157 (Fed. Cir. 2008). “§§ 1710 (e)(1)(D) (providing benefits to those who served “in a theater of combat operations”) and 1712A(a)(l)(B)(i)(I) (same); 26 U.S.C. §§ 2 (a)(3)(B), 112(a)(1) and (b)(1), 692(a)(1), 2201(b)(1)(A) and (B) (providing benefits to those serving in “combat zone”).”
Antoinette M. Faraco v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 261 F.2d 387 (4th Cir. 1958). “Permitting married taxpayers to use the split income device of § 2 of the 1954 Code, 26 U.S. C.A. § 2, while withholding the privilege from single persons, she says is such an arbitrary and unreasonable discrimination that it cannot be allowed under the Constitution.”
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.