Retroactive Tax Legislation

53 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• S.R.G. Corp. v. Dep't OF Revenue
  365 So. 2d 687· Fla.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 62×
  S.R.G. Corporation challenged Florida's corporate income tax on deferred capital gains realized before the tax law's effective date. The Florida Supreme Court held that income realized before January 1, 1972, is not subject to Florida's corporate income tax, even if recognized la
• DeMARTINO v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  862 F.2d 400· 2d Cir.· 1988-11-23 ·cited 35×
  The court affirmed the Tax Court's decision, holding that the crude oil futures straddle trades were sham transactions and their losses were not deductible. The court also upheld the imposition of a negligence penalty and the retroactive application of a higher interest rate for
• Schuneman v. United States
  783 F.2d 694· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-10 ·cited 26×
  Taxpayers are entitled to special use valuation because the adjustable cash rent lease was substantially dependent upon production, and the government must refund interest paid on the state death tax credit from the date of verified proof of payment.
• Temple University-Of the Commonwealth Sys. of Higher Educ. v. United States
  769 F.2d 126· 3d Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the 1965 revenue ruling was not controlling authority and that the statutory language and legislative history from 1939 should govern the interpretation of FICA wages for the period 1979-1982.
• First Nat'l Bank IN Dallas v. The United States
  420 F.2d 725· Ct. Cl.· 1970-01-23 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Interest Equalization Tax Act of 1964, as retroactively applied to the plaintiffs' purchases of Canadian stocks, is constitutional and does not violate the Fifth Amendment's due process clause or the constitutional requirement for apportionment of direct t
• McDonald v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  214 F.2d 341· 2d Cir.· 1954-07-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that livestock held for breeding or dairy purposes, regardless of age, qualify for capital gains treatment under I.R.C. § 117(j) if culled for reasons other than ordinary course of business sale. The court also found that the Commissioner could raise an alternative
• United States v. Binder
  453 F.2d 805· 2d Cir.· 1971-12-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions for conspiracy and substantive offenses related to evading the Interest Equalization Tax did not violate the ex post facto clause, as their illegal acts occurred after the tax became effective.
• Marks v. Higgins
  213 F.2d 884· 2d Cir.· 1954-06-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the settlor's contingent life interest in a trust created in 1935 is includible in his gross estate for tax purposes, despite reliance on a 1934 interpretative ruling.
• Canisius Coll. v. United States
  799 F.2d 18· 2d Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the 1984 Deficit Reduction Act retroactively validated FICA taxes paid under Revenue Ruling 65-208, and this retroactive application is constitutional.
• Neill v. Phinney
  245 F.2d 645· 5th Cir.· 1957-06-10 ·cited 13×
  A corporation actively winding up its affairs, even after a liquidating dividend, remains liable for taxes, and its distributee stockholders are liable as transferees regardless of solvency at the time of distribution.
• Est. OF Jane B. Ceppi v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  698 F.2d 17· 1st Cir.· 1983-01-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the 1976 version of the statute supported the taxpayer's 'subtraction out' theory, the retroactive application of the 1978 version, adopting the IRS's 'de minimis' theory, was constitutional and thus the estate tax exclusion was not allowed.
• Wis. Nipple & Fabricating Corp. v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  581 F.2d 1235· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-26 ·cited 12×
  The Commissioner did not abuse his discretion in retroactively revoking his determination that the taxpayer's profit-sharing plan was qualified, as the taxpayer could not reasonably rely on prior determination letters in light of intervening revenue rulings.
• Shanahan v. The United States
  447 F.2d 1082· 10th Cir.· 1971-08-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the retroactive application of Internal Revenue Code § 483 to impute interest on an installment sale contract was constitutional and did not violate due process.
• Zacks v. United States
  280 F.2d 829· Ct. Cl.· 1960-07-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Public Law 629 created a new cause of action, allowing taxpayers to claim refunds for overpaid income taxes on patent royalties, even if the claim was filed after the statute of limitations had run.
• Ballester-Ripoll v. Court of Tax Appeals of Puerto RICO
  142 F.2d 11· 1st Cir.· 1944-04-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Puerto Rico's mandatory joint income tax return for married couples living together, even if the wife's interest in community property is not vested, does not violate due process or the uniformity requirement of the Organic Act. The court also upheld the retro
• Dep't OF Revenue of the State of Fla. v. Leadership Hous., Inc.
  343 So. 2d 611· Fla.· 1977-03-03 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that capital appreciation in assets is not taxable income until it is realized through a sale or other disposition, even if the appreciation accrued before the constitutional amendment authorizing corporate income tax in 1971. The court reversed the
• In re Freedomeand, Inc.
  480 F.2d 184· 2d Cir.· 1973-06-08 ·cited 8×
  A bankruptcy trustee is considered an employer for withholding tax purposes and must withhold federal and city income taxes on wage claims paid from the bankrupt estate. These withholdings are classified as second priority wage claims.
• Anton Lorenz and Irene Lorenz v. United States
  296 F.2d 746· Ct. Cl.· 1961-12-06 ·cited 8×
  A taxpayer who filed a refund claim shortly after a retroactive tax law was enacted is entitled to recover, even if the claim would otherwise be time-barred.
• Wheeler v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  143 F.2d 162· 9th Cir.· 1944-05-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the 1940 Revenue Act, which sought to retroactively alter the calculation of corporate earnings and profits for tax purposes, could not be applied to a liquidation completed in 1938 under a specific 1938 Act that had a limited effective period.
• Home Mut. Ins. Co. v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  639 F.2d 333· 7th Cir.· 1980-04-29 ·cited 6×
• Purvis v. United States
  501 F.2d 311· 9th Cir.· 1974-07-18 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the retroactive application of the Interest Equalization Tax Act of 1964 to the taxpayer's transactions was unconstitutional.
• Pac. Rock & Gravel Co. v. United States
  297 F.2d 122· 9th Cir.· 1961-08-30 ·cited 6×
• Commissioner OF Internal Revenue v. Superior Yarn Mills, Inc.
  228 F.2d 736· 4th Cir.· 1955-12-21 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the Tax Court's decision regarding the proper allocation of the purchase price between depreciable and non-depreciable assets should be affirmed.
• Commissioner OF Internal Revenue v. Ayres J. Stockly and Esther W. Stockly
  221 F.2d 745· 3d Cir.· 1955-04-18 ·cited 6×
  The majority held that Sections 12(d) and 51(b) of the Code, as amended by the Revenue Act of 1948, could be applied retroactively for the years 1936-1945 in computing the tax limitation on long-term compensation received in 1948.
• Helvering v. Smith
  132 F.2d 965· 4th Cir.· 1942-12-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the taxpayer's deduction for the bank stock assessment in 1936 was not allowable because the loss was not sufficiently ascertained in that year. Therefore, the subsequent recovery of portions of the assessment did not constitute taxable income in 1937 and 1938
• NEW England Baptist Hosp. v. United States
  807 F.2d 280· 1st Cir.· 1986-12-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the Treasury's initial interpretation of the statutes was incorrect, subsequent congressional amendments retroactively validated that interpretation, and this retroactive legislation was constitutional.
• The NEW England Merchs. Nat'l Bank OF Boston u/w Martha A. Alford v. United States
  384 F.2d 176· 1st Cir.· 1967-10-17 ·cited 4×
  A reserved power to alter or revoke a trust, even if created before the relevant tax statute and exercisable only with the consent of a corporate trustee, is includible in the decedent's gross estate if the trustee does not possess a substantially adverse interest.
• Mavity v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  341 F.2d 865· 2d Cir.· 1965-02-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a husband's payment of alimony arrears under a post-1954 separation agreement, even if the arrears accrued under a pre-1954 agreement, is deductible if the payments would have qualified under the 1954 Code provisions.
• Prather v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  322 F.2d 931· 9th Cir.· 1963-09-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the 1958 amendment to Section 481 of the Internal Revenue Code is constitutional and that the taxpayers failed to make a valid election to utilize certain tax relief provisions.
• Cittadini v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  139 F.2d 29· 4th Cir.· 1943-11-15 ·cited 4×
  The taxpayer was not entitled to a bad debt deduction in 1939 under either the original or amended Internal Revenue Code provisions because she failed to prove the debt became worthless in that specific year.
• Irvine v. United States
  981 F.2d 991· 8th Cir.· 1992-12-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the 1958 version of Treas.Reg. § 25.2511-1(c) did not apply to the disclaimer of an interest created by an inter vivos trust, and thus the disclaimer was not a taxable gift.
• Rath v. United States
  733 F.2d 594· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the estate was not entitled to a refund because it failed to make a timely election for special use valuation, a requirement for retroactive application of certain ERTA amendments.
• L.O. Ward and Myra Ward v. United States
  695 F.2d 1351· 10th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the minimum tax on intangible drilling costs was constitutionally enacted retroactively and was not so harsh or oppressive as to be invalid. It also held that the tax was an income tax, not an excise tax, and therefore not deductible.
• Ella Shure Cahen Tr. v. United States
  292 F.2d 33· 7th Cir.· 1961-07-19 ·cited 2×
  Premiums paid by a trust whose income was taxable to the decedent are considered indirectly paid by the decedent for estate tax purposes, and the proportionate share of life insurance proceeds is includible in the gross estate.
• Anne Harley Kohl and William J. Harley v. United States
  226 F.2d 381· 7th Cir.· 1955-10-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that applying amended Internal Revenue Code Section 811(g) to include proceeds of life insurance policies gifted before the amendment, where the decedent retained no incidents of ownership, is unconstitutional as a direct, unapportioned tax and a deprivation of pro
• Petit Anse Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  155 F.2d 797· 5th Cir.· 1946-05-09 ·cited 2×
  Payments under debentures were dividends, not deductible interest, and depletion allowances revised due to new estimates apply only prospectively, not retroactively.
• Meltzer et ux. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  154 F.2d 776· 2d Cir.· 1946-04-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Tax Court's finding that the debt did not become worthless in 1941 was supported by substantial evidence and was therefore conclusive.
• Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Callahan Realty Corp.
  143 F.2d 214· 2d Cir.· 1944-06-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Treasury regulation, which interpreted 'sale' to include 'exchange' for personal holding company surtax purposes, was an invalid broadening of the original statute.
• Honeywell, Inc. v. United States
  973 F.2d 638· 8th Cir.· 1992-08-21
  The court held that the 1989 Act eliminating the WIN tax credit was not an unconstitutional statute of limitations, and Honeywell's claim based on retroactive certifications was invalid.
• Dep't OF Revenue v. Naranja Lakes Condo. Ass'ns Nos. One
  480 So. 2d 175· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-12-17
  The court held that the Department of Revenue is entitled to collect back sales rental taxes for a 3-year period, reversing the trial court's denial of this right.
• Am. Sec. & Tr. Co. v. Dist. OF Columbia
  408 F.2d 1295· D.C. Cir.· 1969-02-10
  The court held that a liquidating dividend attributable to earnings accumulated before January 1, 1939, is subject to District of Columbia income tax, as the relevant statute was amended to include such earnings.
• United States v. Transamerica Corp.
  345 F.2d 765· 9th Cir.· 1965-04-12
  The court held that the change in accounting method was initiated by the taxpayer, allowing the Commissioner to apply Internal Revenue Code Section 481(a) adjustments.
• The N.Y. v. The United States
  331 F.2d 865· Ct. Cl.· 1964-05-15
  The court held that the Retirement-Straight Line Adjustment Act of 1958 did not waive, extend, or revive the statute of limitations for refund claims that were already barred.
• In re TEN Eyck Co., Inc.
  126 F.2d 806· 2d Cir.· 1942-03-19
  The court held that the state could not collect taxes under a retroactive statute that was later deemed discriminatory and violative of the State Constitution's equal protection clause.
• Yellow Cab Co. v. United States and three other cases
  123 F.2d 632· 7th Cir.· 1941-11-14
  The court held that the plaintiffs' contentions regarding the unconstitutionality of the capital stock tax statutes were without merit, affirming the dismissal of their claims.