- 11 - in “taxable income”, for many purposes capital gains and losses are treated differently from other categories of income. It is apparent from the foregoing that over the decades the Congress has chosen to treat capital gains and losses differently from other categories of income; this category of income has been only partially integrated into the section 1 ground rules. C. “Income That Does Not Exist” Petitioners claim that the effect of the $3,000 loss limitation is to tax them on “income that does not exist.” They are mistaken. Petitioners are being taxed under section 1 only on the aggregate of the other categories of income that they in fact realized, recognized, and reported--their income that does exist. Supra table 1. The tax treatment of capital losses has varied over the years. As discussed in Davis v. United States, 87 F.2d 323 (2d Cir. 1937), section 23(r) of the Revenue Act of 1932, ch. 209, 47 Stat. 169, 183, allowed losses from the sale or exchange of stocks and bonds held for less than 2 years only to the extent of gains from the sale of such securities. The taxpayer in Davis had $13,285 of what we now would call short-term capital losses, which was greater than the amount of his net taxable income. 87 F.2d at 324. The taxpayer contended that, as a result, he did not have net income for the taxable year, so that his “net taxable income” was not income, and thus the tax on his netPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011