Powers v. Commissioner
U.S.
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Courts citing this case
Most recently cited by10
- 2013Schwab v. Commissioner 9th Cir.
- 2013United States v. Woods SCOTUS
- 2013Chapman Glen Limited, Petitioner T.C.
- 2013Chapman Glen Ltd. v. Commissioner T.C.
- 2012Cohan v. Comm'r Tax Ct.
- 2007Estate of Jelke v. Commissioner 11th Cir.
- 2006Sta-Home Health Agcy v. CIR 5th Cir.
- 2006Caracci v. Commissioner 5th Cir.
- 2005Estate of Noble v. Comm'r Tax Ct.
- 2005Estate of Helen M. Noble, Deceased; Leslie H. Noble, Jr., & John R. Noble, Co-Personal Representatives, Petitioners T.C.
Cites 3 cases
- Lucas v. Alexander
- Helvering v. Rankin
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Powers
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
POWERS v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.
Attorneys
- Mr. Ralph G. Boyd for petitioner.
- Mr. J. Louis Monarch, with whom Solicitor General Biddle, Assistant Attorney General Clark, and Messrs. Sewall Key, Arnold Raum, and Joseph M. Jones were on the brief, for respondent.
Delivered the opinion of the Court.
The issue in this case is the same as that in Guggenheim v. Rasquin, ante, p. 254. Petitioner in November and December, 1935, purchased single-premium policies of insurance on her own life and late in December, 1935, irrevocably assigned them as gifts. The Commissioner determined a deficiency, claiming that the value of the policies for gift-tax purposes was the cost of duplicating them at the dates of the gifts, not the cash-surrender value as reported by petitioner. The Board of'.Tax Appeals held that the value of the gifts was their cash-surrender value. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. 115 F. 2d 209. That judgment must be affirmed on the authority of Guggenheim v. Rasquin, supra, unless as claimed by petitioner the court below was precluded from substituting its judgment of value for that of the Board. Helvering v. Rankin, 295 U. S. 123, 131. But the question of what criterion should be. employed for determining the “value” of the gifts is a question of law. See Lucas v. Alexander, 279 U. S. 573. Accordingly, the Circuit Court of Appeals was justified in reversing the decision of the Board as “not in accordance with law.” Int. Rev. Code 1939, § 1141 (c) (1); 53 Stat. 164.
Affirmed.