39 Cited authorities

  1. Frank Lyon Co. v. United States

    435 U.S. 561 (1978)   Cited 458 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a “genuine multiple-party transaction” had economic substance, and distinguishing more “familial” arrangements involving only two parties
  2. Comm'r v. Court Holding Co.

    324 U.S. 331 (1945)   Cited 829 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Tax Court was justified in relying on the economic substance doctrine to "attribut[e] the gain from the sale to respondent corporation."
  3. Knetsch v. United States

    364 U.S. 361 (1960)   Cited 418 times
    Holding that the purchase of several annuity bonds was substantively a sham, and should therefore be disregarded in determining the validity of claimed income tax deductions, where the premiums were paid by loans secured by the bonds and additional borrowing reduced the annuity each bond would pay from tens of thousands to a pittance
  4. Commissioner v. Tower

    327 U.S. 280 (1946)   Cited 565 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal law governs whether parties formed partnership for tax purposes
  5. Commissioner v. Clark

    489 U.S. 726 (1989)   Cited 126 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a provision exception "is usually read narrowly in order to preserve the primary operation of the provision"
  6. Horphag Research Ltd. v. Garcia

    475 F.3d 1029 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 211 times
    Recognizing that a district court's determinations at the preliminary injunction stage were "unavailing because such findings were made before discovery was completed and before the evidence was fully developed at trial and were thus not binding on the court at the summary judgment stage"
  7. Gitlitz v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

    531 U.S. 206 (2001)   Cited 83 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Reversing the Tax Court and the Tenth Circuit's interpretation of an "item of income" within I.R.C. § 1366, reasoning, "[b]ecause the Code's plain text permits the taxpayers here to receive these benefits, we need not address [the potential double windfall] policy concern"
  8. Coltec Industries, Inc. v. U.S.

    454 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2006)   Cited 107 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the transaction to be analyzed is the one that gave rise to alleged tax benefit" and rejecting taxpayer's argument that economic substance test requires consideration of broader set of transactions
  9. Commissioner v. Gordon

    391 U.S. 83 (1968)   Cited 95 times
    Holding that "if one transaction is to be characterized as a 'first step' there must be a binding commitment to take the later steps"
  10. E.E.O.C. v. Prospect Airport Servs., Inc.

    621 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 85 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding that plaintiff "unquestionably established a genuine issue of fact regarding whether the conduct was welcome" because, among other reasons, he "swore under oath that it was not," and "[i]t made him cry, both at the time and repeatedly in the deposition"
  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 330,026 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
  12. Section 170 - Charitable, etc., contributions and gifts

    26 U.S.C. § 170   Cited 1,302 times   100 Legal Analyses
    In § 170 and § 501(c)(3), Congress has identified categories of traditionally exempt institutions and has specified certain additional requirements for tax exemption.
  13. Section 1366 - Pass-thru of items to shareholders

    26 U.S.C. § 1366   Cited 362 times   54 Legal Analyses
    Limiting pass-through deductions that shareholder may claim to "shareholder's basis in stock and debt"
  14. Section 1377 - Definitions and special rule

    26 U.S.C. § 1377   Cited 17 times   3 Legal Analyses

    (a) Pro rata share For purposes of this subchapter- (1) In general Except as provided in paragraph (2), each shareholder's pro rata share of any item for any taxable year shall be the sum of the amounts determined with respect to the shareholder- (A) by assigning an equal portion of such item to each day of the taxable year, and (B) then by dividing that portion pro rata among the shares outstanding on such day. (2) Election to terminate year (A) In general Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary