Steven J. and Jean L. Liddane - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         

          regarded the problem as one that could be solved by arriving at             
          an approved definition, which, incidentally, early on included              
          income derived from labor, including salaries, wages, or                    
          compensation,2 the current view, as expressed on behalf of the              
          Supreme Court by Justice Holmes in United States v. Kirby Lumber            
          Co., 284 U.S. 1, 3 (1931), is:  “We see nothing to be gained by             
          the discussion of judicial definitions.  The defendant in error             
          [the taxpayer] has realized within the year an accession to                 
          income, if we take words in their plain popular meaning”.  See              
          also Reading v. Commissioner, 70 T.C. 730, 733 (1978), affd. per            
          curiam 614 F.2d 159 (8th Cir. 1980).                                        
               What petitioners and others who make the misguided arguments           
          that the Court has waded through in this case have failed or                
          refused to recognize, and must realize and understand, is that              
          the courts no longer pay any attention to the metaphysical logic            
          chopping and nit-picking of dicta from old cases about what is              
          “income”.  The correct view, which all Federal courts currently             
          follow and apply, was made clear by Chief Justice Warren in the             
          more recent opinions of the Supreme Court in Commissioner v.                
          Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426 (1955), and General Am.                    
          Investors Co. v. Commissioner, 348 U.S. 434 (1955), that the                

               2 The classic definition was worked out in a series of cases           
          commencing with Stratton's Independence, Ltd. v. Howbert, 231               
          U.S. 399, 415 (1913), through Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co., 247              
          U.S. 179, 185 (1918), and culminating in Eisner v. Macomber, 252            
          U.S. 189, 207 (1920).                                                       




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011