U.S. Code » Title 26 » Subtitle Subtitle A— Income Taxes › Chapter CHAPTER 1— NORMAL TAXES AND SURTAXES › Subchapter Subchapter L— Insurance Companies › Part PART I— LIFE INSURANCE COMPANIES › Subpart Subpart C— Life Insurance Deductions

26 U.S.C. § 809

Repealed. Pub. L. 108–218, title II, § 205(a), Apr. 10, 2004, 118 Stat. 610]

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

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases, 1971–2015 · leading case: Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. v. United States, 103 Fed. Cl. 111 (Fed. Cl. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. v. United States, 103 Fed. Cl. 111 (Fed. Cl. 2012). · cites it 21× “When considering the issue, the Federal Circuit drew a distinction between mutual life insurance companies and stock life insurance companies in interpreting the statute which created the adjustment for policyholder dividends of mutual life insurance companies, 26 U.S.C. § 809…”
Colonial Am. Life Ins. v. Comm'r, 491 U.S. 244 (1989). · cites it 4× “" 26 U. S. C. § 809 (c)(1) (1970 ed.). The sum of the amounts identified in the first clause of the provision minus the amounts excluded in the second part of the provision represents the gross amount of premium income earned by a life insurance company.”
Principal Mut. Life Ins. Co. & Subsidiaries (Now Known as Principal Life Ins. Co. & Subsidiaries) v. United States, 295 F.3d 1241 (Fed. Cir. 2002). · cites it 7× “See 26 U.S.C. § 809 (b)(1). The result is that the deductions for payments to policyholders are limited for mutual companies to payments that can reasonably be considered premium rebates and not returns on equity- An individual company’s average equity base is the average of its…”
Indianapolis Life Ins. Co. & Subsidiary v. United States, 940 F. Supp. 1370 (S.D. Ind. 1996). · cites it 9× “In 1984, Congress rewrote § 809 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. § 809 , to address what it perceived to be an unfair difference between the taxation of income of mutual life insurance companies and stock life insurance companies.”
New York Life Ins. Co. v. United States, 118 F.3d 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “Under section 809(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code), 26 U.S.C. § 809 (a) (1994), the “differential earnings amount” is the amount by which mutual life insurance companies must reduce the deductions for dividends to policy holders authorized by section 808 of the Code.”
Sec. Benefit Life Ins. v. United States, 517 F. Supp. 740 (D. Kan. 1980). · cites it 3× “The difference of opinion between the parties as to what amount should have been reported as income on plaintiff’s 1971 tax return arises from a difference of opinion as to the definition of “compensation” in 26 U.S.C. § 809 (cXl). The parties agree that when, as in the…”
Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. v. United States, 782 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2015). “”) In concluding that MassMutual’s policyholder dividends qualified as a refund or rebate, the Court of Federal Claims cited evidence that the company itself considered these dividends as a return of a portion of the premium and the fact that none of MassMutual’s policyholder…”
Indianapolis Life Ins. Co. & Subsidiary v. United States, 115 F.3d 430 (7th Cir. 1997). · cites it 2× “Section 809 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. § 809 , establishes a complex formula for allocating distributions to mutual policyholders between investment earnings and implicit dividends on imputed stock ownership.”
Oxford Life Ins. v. United States, 574 F. Supp. 1417 (D. Ariz. 1983). · cites it 5× “CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT The four main issues presented to the Court in connection with parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment are as follows: (1) Whether the intangible value of the block of insurance policies acquired by Plaintiff in 1973 must be included in…”
The Union Cent. Life Ins. Co., Cross-Appellant v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Cross-Appellee, 720 F.2d 420 (6th Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “§ 804 (c)(1) rather than under 26 U.S.C. § 809 as contended by the Commissioner.”
Merit Life Ins. Co. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 853 F.2d 1435 (7th Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “26 U.S.C. § 809 (emphasis added). 5 . The Commissioner also found a deficiency in Merit’s 1972 tax return.”
Am. Mut. Life Ins. Co. & Subsidiaries v. United States, 267 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2001). “” American Mut., 46 Fed. Cl. at 453 . The Code provisions at issue contemplate the eventual release of the reserves with the purpose of causing the reserve releases to be taken into taxable income.”
Show all 28 citing cases →
— 26 U.S.C. § 809(b) — 1 case
Merit Life Ins. Co. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 853 F.2d 1435 (7th Cir. 1988). “26 U.S.C. § 809 (emphasis added). 5 . The Commissioner also found a deficiency in Merit’s 1972 tax return.”
— 26 U.S.C. § 809(c)(1) — 1 case
Modern Am. Life Ins. v. Comm'r, 818 F.2d 1386 (8th Cir. 1987).
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.