Richard L. Hutcheson and Deloris A. Hutcheson - Page 12

                                                 - 12 -                                                   
                  In Hope v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 1020 (1971), affd. 471 F.2d                            
            738 (3d Cir. 1973), the taxpayer sold his stock for $20 a share,                              
            but later discovered that the stock at that time was trading for                              
            over $50 a share on the market.  Id. at 1026.  In the year of the                             
            sale, he filed a complaint for rescission against the agent and                               
            the purchasers of the optioned stock.  Id.  The following year,                               
            the parties settled the dispute.  Id. at 1027.  When his case                                 
            came before the Tax Court, the taxpayer argued that "his                                      
            complaint requesting a rescission of the sale postponed his                                   
            obligation to return the income from the sale until the year in                               
            which the suit was settled."  Id. at 1030.  This Court disagreed,                             
            holding that since the taxpayer had unfettered discretion to use                              
            the funds when he received them, "the mere filing of the suit by                              
            the petitioner was not of itself sufficient to postpone the                                   
            realization of gain on the completed sale."  Id. at 1030-1031.                                
            The Court also held that settlement of the suit was not the same                              
            as rescission.  Id.                                                                           
                  Like the taxpayer in Hope, petitioners here had unhindered                              
            control over the funds they received from the January 3, 1989,                                
            sale.  Although they brought proceedings for rescission, since                                
            both the funds and the decision to seek a rescission were wholly                              
            within their control, they have failed to demonstrate that a                                  
            rescission occurred which would postpone realization of the gain.                             
            See Hope v. Commissioner, 471 F.2d 738, 742 (3d Cir. 1973).                                   
            Moreover, the settlement of petitioners' proceedings, which                                   




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011