468:
tax "is levied on income derived from corporate earnings," when in truth the stockholder has "derived" nothing except paper certificates which, so far as they have any effect, deny him present participation in such earnings. It contends that the tax may be laid when earnings "are received by the stockholder," whereas he has received none; that the profits are "distributed by means of a stock dividend," although a stock dividend distributes no profits; that under the Act of 1916 "the tax is on the stockholder's share in corporate earnings," when in truth a stockholder has no such share, and receives none in a stock dividend; that "the profits are segregated from his former capital, and he has a separate certificate representing his invested profits or gains," whereas there has been no segregation of profits, nor has he any separate certificate representing a personal gain, since the certificates, new and old, are alike in what they represent—a capital interest in the entire concerns of the corporation.
598:, a taxpayer-landlord repossessed a property from a tenant—property that had been subject to a 99-year lease - after the tenant failed to pay rent and taxes. The lease had allowed for the tenant to construct a new building or other improvements. The tenant had removed the existing building and built a new one. The value of the new building, as of the date of repossession, was $ 64,245.68. The government contended that the landlord realized a gain of $ 51,434.25, the difference between the value of the building at the date of repossession and the landlord's basis in the old building of $ 12,811.43. The landlord argued that there was no realization of the property because no transaction had occurred, and that the improvement of the property that created the gain was unseverable from the landlord's original capital.
31:
381:, a transaction in which the corporation multiplies the total number of shares outstanding but gives the new shares to shareholders in proportion to the number that they had held. For example, if a corporation declares a "two for one" stock split and distributes no money or other property to any stockholder, a stockholder who held 100 shares at $ 4 per share will now hold 200 shares with a value of $ 2 each, both of which with $ 400 in value.
900:
398:
paper to represent the same equitable interest; they do not transfer assets or create new priorities among the security-holders. The total value of the common shares, though now spread out over a larger number of units, is left unchanged from its previous level. In effect, nothing of substance has occurred."
656:
Just as we deem the legislative intent manifest to tax the stockholder with respect to such accumulations only if and when, and to the extent that, his interest in them comes to fruition as income, that is, in dividends declared, so we can perceive no constitutional obstacle that stands in the way of
486:
took issue with the majority's interpretation of income. He argued that the
Sixteenth Amendment authorized Congress to tax "incomes, from whatever source derived" and that the authors of the amendment "intended to include thereby everything which by reasonable understanding can fairly be regarded as
460:
Although the Court acknowledged the power of the
Federal Government to tax income under the Sixteenth Amendment, it essentially said that Congress was not given the power to tax as income anything other than income. In others words, Congress did not have the power to redefine "income" as it appeared
414:
in the end comes down to a "battle of similarities." Is a stock dividend (as the majority held) "more like" a situation in which a corporation simply accumulates its earnings and makes no distribution at all? Or is it (as
Brandeis thought) "more like" the receipt of a cash dividend which is followed
639:
In order, therefore, that the clauses cited from
Article I of the Constitution may have proper force and effect save only as modified by the Amendment, and that the latter also may have proper effect, it is essential to distinguish between what is and what is not income" as the term is there used;
490:
He noted that in business circles, cash dividends and stock dividends were treated identically. In effect, he argued that a stock dividend is really a cash dividend since it is really two-step affair, with a cash distribution that is then used to purchase additional shares by the exercise of stock
467:
Throughout the argument of the
Government, in a variety of forms, runs the fundamental error already mentioned—a failure to appraise correctly the force of the term "income" as used in the Sixteenth Amendment, or at least to give practical effect to it. Thus, the Government contends that the
389:
A shareholder's assets do not grow after this sort of stock dividend. Metaphorically, the "pie" is still the same size, but it has been sliced into more pieces, each piece being proportionately smaller. Of course, the same is true of a cash dividend: the shareholder gains cash, but the corporation
397:
However, several important factors distinguish a stock and cash dividend. "Overall, the aim of the tax law is to impose a tax on "dividends" when assets representing corporate earnings are transferred to the shareholders. Stock dividends, however, merely give the shareholders additional pieces of
124:
stock dividend in which a shareholder received no actual cash or other property and retained the same proportionate share of ownership of the corporation as was held prior to the dividend was not income to the shareholder within the meaning of the
Sixteenth Amendment. An income tax imposed by the
495:
Justice
Brandeis' effort to construct, or read in, a cash distribution was strained and unconvincing. The plain fact is that Mrs. Macomber did not receive, and could not have obtained, a cash payment from Standard Oil. Had she wished to substitute cash in an amount equivalent to the value of the
446:
We are clear that not only does a stock dividend really take nothing from the property of the corporation and add nothing to that of the shareholder, but that the antecedent accumulation of profits evidenced thereby, while indicating that the shareholder is richer because of an increase of his
487:
income." Also, "Congress possesses the power which it exercised to make dividends representing profits, taxable as income, whether the medium in which the dividend is paid be cash or stock, and that it may define, as it has done, what dividends representing profits shall be deemed income."
393:
A shareholder also makes no "sale or other disposition" of stock after this sort of stock dividend. The taxpayer still owns the same proportionate percentage of the corporation that was owned before the stock dividend. Again, that is true of a cash dividend as well.
659:
Congress was at liberty under the amendment to tax as income, without apportionment, everything that became income, in the ordinary sense of the word, after the adoption of the amendment, including dividends received in the ordinary course by a stockholder from a
457:, it had clearly stated that stock dividends were not income, as nothing of value was received by Towne; the company was not worth any less than it was when the dividend was declared, and the total value of Towne's stock had not changed.
662:, even though they were extraordinary in amount and might appear upon analysis to be a mere realization in possession of an inchoate and contingent interest that the stockholder had in a surplus of corporate assets previously existing.
268:
where a shareholder received no actual cash or other property and retained the same proportionate share of ownership of the corporation as was held prior to the dividend by the shareholder was not income to the shareholder under the
642:
Congress by any definition it may adopt cannot conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the
Constitution, from which it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully
409:
was not whether the shareholder had gain in an economic sense, but whether in legal or accounting terms the stock dividend was to be regarded as a taxable event.... Stripped of its
Constitutional element, the issue in
360:
The current statute expressly included stock dividends in income, and the government contended that the certificates should be taxed as income to
Macomber as if the corporation had distributed money to her. She sued
601:
The Court ruled against the landlord and decided that the landlord had realized a gain upon repossession of the property. The Court also said that "severance" was no longer an element of realization.
1622:
303:, which allowed taxation of income without regard to source (income from either property or vocations and employment) and without regard to a state's Congressional representation.
1031:
915:
712:
690:
584:
560:
544:
528:
312:
300:
270:
235:
74:
1627:
670:
are that the word "income" in the Sixteenth Amendment is generally given its ordinary plain English meaning and that wealth and property that are not income may not be taxed
521:
were income and that they should be recognized as income when the stock was sold. In addition, the exception for stock dividends was narrowed by the Court in such cases as
295:
that a tax from income on property, unlike a tax on income from employment or vocations, had to be proportionate to the states' congressional representation. In 1913, the
570: (1923) (increases in capital accumulated by corporations over time were taxable when shares were distributed to stockholders in a successor corporation).
1082:
1617:
291:
1022:
357:
of which represented earnings accumulated by the company, recapitalized rather than distributed, since the effective date of the original tax law.
1632:
1575:
850:
791:
766:
741:
125:
Revenue Act of 1916 on such a dividend was unconstitutional even if the dividend indirectly represented accrued earnings of the corporation.
1503:
1047:
1284:
440:
ruled that the stock dividend was not a realization of income by the taxpayer-shareholder for the purposes of the Sixteenth Amendment:
1324:
1276:
249:
35:
1332:
904:
538: (1921) (shares in a subsidiary corporation that were issued to stockholders in the parent corporation were taxable as income);
491:
subscription rights. Brandeis saw no reason for two essentially-identical transactions to be treated differently for tax purposes:
1511:
1191:
1055:
56:
Mark Eisner, as Collector of United States Internal Revenue for the Third District of the State of New York v. Myrtle H. Macomber
613:
1399:
1527:
496:
stock dividend, she would have had to sell the dividend shares to other investors. No other cash source was made available.
1594:
1482:
1431:
1114:
1106:
1015:
617:
1559:
1551:
1340:
1308:
390:
that is represented by his shares has also lost cash. The shares thus implicitly decline in value by an equal amount.
1543:
1519:
1268:
1316:
1567:
1300:
341:
passed a revenue collection statute that specifically stated that stock dividends were to be considered as income.
1183:
1143:
540:
1458:
1063:
517:
In any event, the success of investors in avoiding tax was short lived. The following year, the Court ruled that
156:
1199:
1175:
1008:
523:
327:
1474:
1260:
1466:
1292:
1231:
1223:
971:
1535:
180:
1359:
1239:
1439:
1423:
1383:
1207:
919:
820:
716:
588:
564:
556:
548:
532:
316:
140:
66:
1367:
1159:
1391:
1135:
1215:
1151:
640:
and to apply the distinction as cases arise according to truth and substance without regard to form.
93:
953:
935:
168:
81:
1637:
1415:
1407:
880:
625:
579:
501:
420:
192:
842:
829:
353:, which declared a 50% stock dividend. She received 1,100 additional shares, about $ 20,000 in
846:
816:
787:
762:
737:
447:
capital, at the same time shows he has not realized or received any income in the transaction.
1000:
944:
872:
277:
1090:
308:
993:
988:
926:
1375:
962:
860:
719:
684:
657:
carrying out this intent when dividends are declared out of a pre-existing surplus....
591:
567:
551:
535:
483:
319:
184:
160:
148:
110:
Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York
1611:
518:
437:
296:
172:
89:
981:
350:
69:
276:
An income tax that was imposed by the Revenue Act of 1916 on such a dividend was
784:
Federal Income Taxation: A Law Student's Guide to the Leading Cases and Concepts
759:
Federal Income Taxation: A Law Student's Guide to the Leading Cases and Concepts
734:
Federal Income Taxation: A Law Student's Guide to the Leading Cases and Concepts
378:
362:
338:
280:
even if the dividend indirectly represented accrued earnings of the corporation.
980:
Unsuccessful attempts to use Macomber as justification for not paying taxes at
899:
573:
In 1940, the Supreme Court departed from the realization concept described in
85:
809:
354:
258:
648:
The Supreme Court in the case discussed what was income, and quoted from
374:
265:
635:
Here is a typical quote from the case used as support of this position:
884:
839:
Tax stories: An in-depth look at ten leading federal income tax cases
876:
322: (1918), had addressed a nearly-identical situation to one in
621:
594: (1940) that "severance" is not an element of realization. In
474:
The Court ordered that Macomber be refunded the tax she overpaid.
262:
1004:
616:. Its rather narrow but important application has been used by
30:
786:(Tenth ed.). New York, NY: Foundation Press. p. 80.
761:(Tenth ed.). New York, NY: Foundation Press. p. 80.
736:(Tenth ed.). New York, NY: Foundation Press. p. 80.
415:
by a reinvestment of the cash received in additional shares?
209:
Pitney, joined by White, McKenna, Van Devanter, McReynolds
812:
History of Accounting: An International Encyclopedia,
691:
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 252
1623:
United States Supreme Court cases of the White Court
1586:
1493:
1450:
1351:
1250:
1125:
1074:
1039:
632:decision was not about wages, but stock dividends.
365:, the Collector of Internal Revenue, for a refund.
229:
221:
213:
205:
200:
129:
114:
106:
101:
61:
51:
42:
23:
828:
1285:Continental Tie & Lumber Co. v. United States
248:, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), was a tax case before the
1277:Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. United States
493:
403:
92:¶ 32; 3 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 3020; 1920-3 C.B. 25; 9
1333:General American Investors Co. v. Commissioner
994:Pennybaker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
506:Federal Income Taxation, A Law Student's Guide
425:Federal Income Taxation, A Law Student's Guide
377:in this case was the economic equivalent of a
1016:
989:Snyder v. Indiana Department of State Revenue
823:. New York: Garland Publishing, 1996. P. 226.
810:Chatfield, Michael. "Eisner v. Macomber." In
8:
252:that is notable for the following holdings:
1628:United States Sixteenth Amendment case law
1023:
1009:
1001:
20:
405:Essentially, therefore, the question in
401:The issue in the case was the following:
349:Myrtle H. Macomber owned 2,200 shares in
1192:Merchants' Loan & Trust v. Smietanka
1083:Stratton's Independence, Ltd. v. Howbert
292:Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.
1576:United States v. General Dynamics Corp.
1400:United States v. Safety Car Heating Co.
841:. New York: Foundation Press. pp.
834:: The Continuing Legacy of Realization"
701:
1528:Helvering v. Independent Life Ins. Co.
369:Economic substance of a stock dividend
18:1920 United States Supreme Court case
7:
863:(1933). "When Is Income Realized?".
1560:Hoover Express Co. v. United States
1504:Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad
1048:Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad
289:In 1895, the Supreme Court held in
1552:Tank Truck Rentals v. Commissioner
1512:Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co.
1341:Commissioner v. Gillette Motor Co.
1325:Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.
1309:Helvering v. Northwest Steel Mills
385:Stock dividends vs. cash dividends
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
1618:United States Supreme Court cases
1032:United States Sixteenth Amendment
922:189 (1920) is available from:
436:In the majority opinion, Justice
1056:Stanton v. Baltic Mining Company
898:
827:Kornhauser, Marjorie E. (2002).
29:
1544:Millinery Corp. v. Commissioner
1520:McLaughlin v. Alliance Ins. Co.
1269:Burk-Waggoner Assoc. v. Hopkins
628:cannot be taxed as income. The
1633:1920 in United States case law
1317:Crane-Johnson Co. v. Helvering
326:. (Eisner was responsible for
1:
1595:Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co.
1301:Helvering v. National Grocery
1107:Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co.
333:However, in the aftermath of
1184:Rockefeller v. United States
1144:Southern Pacific Co. v. Lowe
782:Chirelstein, Marvin (2005).
757:Chirelstein, Marvin (2005).
732:Chirelstein, Marvin (2005).
541:Rockefeller v. United States
45:Reargued October 17–20, 1919
1064:Tyee Realty Co. v. Anderson
837:. In Caron, Paul L. (ed.).
674:by the Federal Government.
330:Collection in both cases).
250:United States Supreme Court
1654:
1568:Cammarano v. United States
225:Brandeis, joined by Clarke
1459:United States v. Sullivan
1200:Miles v. Safe Deposit Co.
234:
134:
119:
28:
1475:Commissioner v. Sullivan
1261:Edwards v. Cuba Railroad
1176:United States v. Phellis
666:Important principles in
524:United States v. Phellis
482:In the dissent, Justice
453:The Court noted that in
1467:Rutkin v. United States
306:In 1918, the Court, in
1483:James v. United States
1432:United States v. Davis
1115:Moore v. United States
664:
646:
510:
429:
1440:Commissioner v. Tufts
1424:Crane v. Commissioner
1293:Helvering v. Mitchell
1232:Koshland v. Helvering
1224:Marr v. United States
821:Richard Vangermeersch
654:
637:
605:Use by tax protesters
461:in the Constitution:
217:Holmes, joined by Day
47:Decided March 8, 1920
43:Argued April 16, 1919
1536:Helvering v. Winmill
157:Oliver W. Holmes Jr.
1360:Goodrich v. Edwards
1240:Helvering v. Gowran
1128:corporate dividends
972:Library of Congress
301:Sixteenth Amendment
271:Sixteenth Amendment
236:Sixteenth Amendment
181:James C. McReynolds
169:Willis Van Devanter
90:U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH)
1587:Diminution of loss
1416:Helvering v. Horst
1408:Helvering v. Bruun
1384:Lucas v. Alexander
1253:corporate earnings
1208:Cullinan v. Walker
1168:Eisner v. Macomber
1099:Eisner v. Macomber
912:Eisner v. Macomber
905:Eisner v. Macomber
865:Harvard Law Review
861:Magill, Roswell F.
709:Eisner v. Macomber
668:Eisner v. Macomber
610:Eisner v. Macomber
580:Helvering v. Bruun
575:Eisner v. Macomber
557:Cullinan v. Walker
502:Marvin Chirelstein
421:Marvin Chirelstein
412:Eisner v. Macomber
324:Eisner v. Macomber
245:Eisner v. Macomber
145:Associate Justices
80:40 S. Ct. 189; 64
24:Eisner v. Macomber
1605:
1604:
1368:Walsh v. Brewster
1160:Peabody v. Eisner
903:Works related to
852:978-1-58778-403-3
817:Michael Chatfield
793:978-1-58778-894-9
768:978-1-58778-894-9
743:978-1-58778-894-9
614:US income tax law
612:is a key case in
241:
240:
1645:
1392:Burnet v. Harmel
1136:Lynch v. Turrish
1025:
1018:
1011:
1002:
976:
970:
967:
961:
958:
952:
949:
943:
940:
934:
931:
925:
902:
888:
856:
836:
798:
797:
779:
773:
772:
754:
748:
747:
729:
723:
706:
577:when it held in
554: (1921) and
508:
427:
328:Internal Revenue
278:unconstitutional
130:Court membership
33:
32:
21:
1653:
1652:
1648:
1647:
1646:
1644:
1643:
1642:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1601:
1582:
1495:
1489:
1451:Unlawful income
1446:
1347:
1252:
1246:
1216:Weiss v. Stearn
1152:Lynch v. Hornby
1127:
1121:
1091:Towne v. Eisner
1070:
1035:
1029:
974:
968:
965:
959:
956:
950:
947:
941:
938:
932:
929:
923:
895:
877:10.2307/1332063
859:
853:
826:
806:
801:
794:
781:
780:
776:
769:
756:
755:
751:
744:
731:
730:
726:
707:
703:
699:
680:
650:Towne v. Eisner
620:who argue that
607:
515:
509:
500:
480:
455:Towne v. Eisner
434:
428:
419:
387:
371:
347:
335:Towne v. Eisner
309:Towne v. Eisner
287:
183:
171:
159:
141:Edward D. White
97:
46:
44:
38:
19:
12:
11:
5:
1651:
1649:
1641:
1640:
1635:
1630:
1625:
1620:
1610:
1609:
1603:
1602:
1600:
1599:
1590:
1588:
1584:
1583:
1581:
1580:
1572:
1564:
1556:
1548:
1540:
1532:
1524:
1516:
1508:
1499:
1497:
1496:and exemptions
1491:
1490:
1488:
1487:
1479:
1471:
1463:
1454:
1452:
1448:
1447:
1445:
1444:
1436:
1428:
1420:
1412:
1404:
1396:
1388:
1380:
1376:Taft v. Bowers
1372:
1364:
1355:
1353:
1349:
1348:
1346:
1345:
1337:
1329:
1321:
1313:
1305:
1297:
1289:
1281:
1273:
1265:
1256:
1254:
1248:
1247:
1245:
1244:
1236:
1228:
1220:
1212:
1204:
1196:
1188:
1180:
1172:
1164:
1156:
1148:
1140:
1131:
1129:
1123:
1122:
1120:
1119:
1111:
1103:
1095:
1087:
1078:
1076:
1072:
1071:
1069:
1068:
1060:
1052:
1043:
1041:
1037:
1036:
1030:
1028:
1027:
1020:
1013:
1005:
999:
998:
997:
996:
991:
977:
954:Google Scholar
908:
894:
893:External links
891:
890:
889:
871:(6): 933–953.
857:
851:
830:"The Story of
824:
805:
802:
800:
799:
792:
774:
767:
749:
742:
724:
700:
698:
695:
694:
693:
688:
685:Irwin v. Gavit
679:
676:
618:tax protesters
606:
603:
514:
511:
498:
484:Louis Brandeis
479:
476:
472:
471:
470:
469:
451:
450:
449:
448:
433:
430:
417:
386:
383:
370:
367:
346:
343:
286:
283:
282:
281:
274:
239:
238:
232:
231:
227:
226:
223:
219:
218:
215:
211:
210:
207:
203:
202:
198:
197:
196:
195:
193:John H. Clarke
185:Louis Brandeis
161:William R. Day
149:Joseph McKenna
146:
143:
138:
132:
131:
127:
126:
117:
116:
112:
111:
108:
104:
103:
99:
98:
79:
63:
59:
58:
53:
52:Full case name
49:
48:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1650:
1639:
1636:
1634:
1631:
1629:
1626:
1624:
1621:
1619:
1616:
1615:
1613:
1597:
1596:
1592:
1591:
1589:
1585:
1578:
1577:
1573:
1570:
1569:
1565:
1562:
1561:
1557:
1554:
1553:
1549:
1546:
1545:
1541:
1538:
1537:
1533:
1530:
1529:
1525:
1522:
1521:
1517:
1514:
1513:
1509:
1506:
1505:
1501:
1500:
1498:
1492:
1485:
1484:
1480:
1477:
1476:
1472:
1469:
1468:
1464:
1461:
1460:
1456:
1455:
1453:
1449:
1442:
1441:
1437:
1434:
1433:
1429:
1426:
1425:
1421:
1418:
1417:
1413:
1410:
1409:
1405:
1402:
1401:
1397:
1394:
1393:
1389:
1386:
1385:
1381:
1378:
1377:
1373:
1370:
1369:
1365:
1362:
1361:
1357:
1356:
1354:
1352:Taxable gains
1350:
1343:
1342:
1338:
1335:
1334:
1330:
1327:
1326:
1322:
1319:
1318:
1314:
1311:
1310:
1306:
1303:
1302:
1298:
1295:
1294:
1290:
1287:
1286:
1282:
1279:
1278:
1274:
1271:
1270:
1266:
1263:
1262:
1258:
1257:
1255:
1249:
1242:
1241:
1237:
1234:
1233:
1229:
1226:
1225:
1221:
1218:
1217:
1213:
1210:
1209:
1205:
1202:
1201:
1197:
1194:
1193:
1189:
1186:
1185:
1181:
1178:
1177:
1173:
1170:
1169:
1165:
1162:
1161:
1157:
1154:
1153:
1149:
1146:
1145:
1141:
1138:
1137:
1133:
1132:
1130:
1124:
1117:
1116:
1112:
1109:
1108:
1104:
1101:
1100:
1096:
1093:
1092:
1088:
1085:
1084:
1080:
1079:
1077:
1073:
1066:
1065:
1061:
1058:
1057:
1053:
1050:
1049:
1045:
1044:
1042:
1038:
1033:
1026:
1021:
1019:
1014:
1012:
1007:
1006:
1003:
995:
992:
990:
987:
986:
985:
983:
978:
973:
964:
955:
946:
937:
936:CourtListener
928:
921:
917:
913:
909:
907:at Wikisource
906:
901:
897:
896:
892:
886:
882:
878:
874:
870:
866:
862:
858:
854:
848:
844:
840:
835:
833:
825:
822:
818:
814:
813:
808:
807:
803:
795:
789:
785:
778:
775:
770:
764:
760:
753:
750:
745:
739:
735:
728:
725:
721:
718:
714:
710:
705:
702:
696:
692:
689:
687:
686:
682:
681:
677:
675:
673:
669:
663:
661:
653:
651:
645:
644:
636:
633:
631:
627:
623:
619:
615:
611:
604:
602:
599:
597:
593:
590:
586:
582:
581:
576:
571:
569:
566:
562:
559:
558:
553:
550:
546:
543:
542:
537:
534:
530:
526:
525:
520:
519:capital gains
512:
507:
503:
497:
492:
488:
485:
477:
475:
466:
465:
464:
463:
462:
458:
456:
445:
444:
443:
442:
441:
439:
438:Mahlon Pitney
431:
426:
422:
416:
413:
408:
402:
399:
395:
391:
384:
382:
380:
376:
368:
366:
364:
358:
356:
352:
344:
342:
340:
336:
331:
329:
325:
321:
318:
314:
311:
310:
304:
302:
299:ratified the
298:
297:United States
294:
293:
284:
279:
275:
272:
267:
264:
261:
260:
255:
254:
253:
251:
247:
246:
237:
233:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
208:
204:
201:Case opinions
199:
194:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
173:Mahlon Pitney
170:
166:
162:
158:
154:
150:
147:
144:
142:
139:
137:Chief Justice
136:
135:
133:
128:
123:
118:
113:
109:
105:
100:
95:
91:
87:
83:
77:
76:
71:
68:
64:
60:
57:
54:
50:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
1593:
1574:
1566:
1558:
1550:
1542:
1534:
1526:
1518:
1510:
1502:
1481:
1473:
1465:
1457:
1438:
1430:
1422:
1414:
1406:
1398:
1390:
1382:
1374:
1366:
1358:
1339:
1331:
1323:
1315:
1307:
1299:
1291:
1283:
1275:
1267:
1259:
1238:
1230:
1222:
1214:
1206:
1198:
1190:
1182:
1174:
1167:
1166:
1158:
1150:
1142:
1134:
1113:
1105:
1098:
1097:
1089:
1081:
1062:
1054:
1046:
982:quatloos.com
979:
911:
868:
864:
838:
831:
811:
783:
777:
758:
752:
733:
727:
722: (1920).
708:
704:
683:
671:
667:
665:
658:
655:
649:
647:
641:
638:
634:
629:
609:
608:
600:
595:
578:
574:
572:
555:
539:
522:
516:
505:
494:
489:
481:
473:
459:
454:
452:
435:
424:
411:
406:
404:
400:
396:
392:
388:
372:
359:
351:Standard Oil
348:
334:
332:
323:
307:
305:
290:
288:
257:
244:
243:
242:
230:Laws applied
188:
176:
164:
152:
121:
102:Case history
73:
55:
15:
660:corporation
379:stock split
363:Mark Eisner
339:US Congress
285:Prior cases
1612:Categories
1494:Deductions
815:edited by
697:References
373:The stock
86:U.S. LEXIS
84:521; 1920
1638:Dividends
672:as income
643:exercised
513:Aftermath
355:par value
62:Citations
1034:case law
910:Text of
832:Macomber
678:See also
630:Macomber
499:—
478:Dissents
432:Decision
418:—
407:Macomber
375:dividend
266:dividend
259:pro rata
206:Majority
122:pro rata
88:1605; 1
1251:Taxable
1126:Taxable
945:Findlaw
927:Cornell
885:1332063
804:Sources
222:Dissent
214:Dissent
115:Holding
1598:(1926)
1579:(1987)
1571:(1959)
1563:(1958)
1555:(1958)
1547:(1956)
1539:(1938)
1531:(1934)
1523:(1932)
1515:(1931)
1507:(1915)
1486:(1961)
1478:(1958)
1470:(1952)
1462:(1927)
1443:(1983)
1435:(1962)
1427:(1947)
1419:(1940)
1411:(1940)
1403:(1936)
1395:(1932)
1387:(1929)
1379:(1929)
1371:(1921)
1363:(1921)
1344:(1960)
1336:(1955)
1328:(1955)
1320:(1940)
1312:(1940)
1304:(1938)
1296:(1938)
1288:(1932)
1280:(1932)
1272:(1925)
1264:(1925)
1243:(1937)
1235:(1936)
1227:(1925)
1219:(1924)
1211:(1923)
1203:(1922)
1195:(1921)
1187:(1921)
1179:(1921)
1171:(1920)
1163:(1918)
1155:(1918)
1147:(1918)
1139:(1918)
1118:(2024)
1110:(1926)
1102:(1920)
1094:(1918)
1086:(1913)
1075:Income
1067:(1916)
1059:(1916)
1051:(1916)
975:
969:
966:
963:Justia
960:
957:
951:
948:
942:
939:
933:
930:
924:
883:
849:
790:
765:
740:
711:,
337:, the
191:
189:·
187:
179:
177:·
175:
167:
165:·
163:
155:
153:·
151:
94:A.L.R.
82:L. Ed.
1040:Scope
918:
881:JSTOR
843:53–96
715:
626:labor
624:from
622:wages
596:Bruun
587:
563:
547:
531:
345:Facts
315:
263:stock
107:Prior
920:U.S.
847:ISBN
819:and
788:ISBN
763:ISBN
738:ISBN
717:U.S.
589:U.S.
565:U.S.
549:U.S.
533:U.S.
317:U.S.
96:1570
75:more
67:U.S.
65:252
916:252
873:doi
720:189
713:252
592:461
585:309
568:134
561:262
552:176
545:257
536:156
529:257
320:418
313:245
70:189
1614::
914:,
879:.
869:46
867:.
845:.
652::
583:,
527:,
504:,
423:,
256:A
120:A
1024:e
1017:t
1010:v
984::
887:.
875::
855:.
796:.
771:.
746:.
273:.
78:)
72:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.