26 U.S.C. § 4403
Record requirements
Each person liable for tax under this subchapter shall keep a daily record showing the gross amount of all wagers on which he is so liable, in addition to all other records required pursuant to section 6001(a).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19
cases, 1960–2001 · leading case: Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39 (1968).
Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39 (1968). “26 U. S. C. §§ 4403 , 4423. Moreover, each principal internal revenue office is instructed to maintain for public inspection a listing of all who have paid the occupational tax, and to provide certified copies of the listing upon request to any state or local prosecuting officer.”
United States v. John M. Haydel, Jr., A/K/A \Ice Cream\" & \"Mugsy\"", 649 F.2d 1152 (5th Cir. 1981). “26 U.S.C. §§ 4403 , 4412 and 6001. If Haydel had been charged with violating a gambling statute instead of the wagering tax law, the issue would be whether the statutory requirement that he file wager returns compelled him to record information that incriminated him for another…”
United States v. Freddie G. Lochamy & Anthony J. Salinas, 724 F.2d 494 (5th Cir. 1984). “See 26 U.S.C. § 4403 (requiring persons who accept wagers to keep a daily record of their wagering activities.”
United States v. Threadgill, 172 F.3d 357 (5th Cir. 1999). “” 26 U.S.C. § 4403 . There are limits, however, on the extent to which those records may be used against a taxpayer.”
Hamilton v. United States, 309 F. Supp. 468 (S.D.N.Y. 1969). “Plaintiff had not kept a daily record of the wagers as required by 26 U.S.C. § 4403 . 4 The only available figures were taken from wagering records in the form of “policy slips” for the period May 19-21, 1965, which had been seized pursuant to search warrants issued by the…”
Dorothy Olster v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue Serv., 751 F.2d 1168 (11th Cir. 1985). “1279 , taxpayer questioned the assessment determined by the taxing authorities pursuant to the record requirements for wagers, 26 U.S.C.A. § 4403 , and the authority to prepare returns for those failing to make a return, 26 U.”
United States v. Brian, 507 F. Supp. 761 (D.R.I. 1981). “Martin argues that if he were in the business of accepting wagers as alleged in the indictment, then he was required by 26 U.S.C. § 4403 to keep the records that were seized; if he were compelled by the Tax Code to maintain such records, then their use against him in a gambling…”
United States v. Thomas D. Clancy, James F. Prindable & Donald Kastner, 276 F.2d 617 (7th Cir. 1960). “Under 26 U.S.C. §§ 4403 , 4423, 6001, and United States.”
Frank A. Delorenzo v. United States, 555 F.2d 27 (2d Cir. 1977). “However, precise calibration of the amount of wagers placed in these circumstances is not feasible.”
United States v. Joseph P. Lucia, (Two Cases), 416 F.2d 920 (5th Cir. 1969). “That count charged him with attempting to evade the excise tax on wagering (1) by failing to file the required Form 730 (Tax on Wagering Returns), (2) by failing to keep certain records as required by 26 U.S.C. § 4403 and (3) by various acts of concealment, all in violation of…”
Pizzarello v. United States, 408 F.2d 579 (2d Cir. 1969). “One engaged in the business of accepting wagers is required by 26 U.S.C. §§ 4403 and 4423 to keep daily records of the gross wagers received and to produce them “as frequently as may be needful to the enforcement of this [tax].”
Joseph P. Lucia v. United States of Am., 447 F.2d 912 (5th Cir. 1971). “The aspect of the assessment which troubled the Second Circuit was discussed in the Court’s opinion as follows: “One engaged in the business of accepting wagers is required by 26 U.S.C. §§ 4403 and 4423 to keep daily records of the gross wagers received and to produce them ‘as…”
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.