- 15 -
Thus, the sums were not paid “under an obligation to make the
payments in return for adequate and full consideration” (emphasis
added) within the meaning of Article 20(5) of the treaty.
As the treaty is silent with respect to gambling winnings,
and petitioner has failed to establish that the payments at issue
were an “annuity” within the treaty’s meaning, the treaty does
not prevent the United States from imposing a tax under section
871(a)(1)(A) upon such payments. Accordingly, respondent is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law. We shall therefore
grant respondent’s cross-motion for summary judgment and deny
petitioner’s motion. To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order and
decision will be entered.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: May 25, 2011