United States Tax Court, 1952

Petterson v. Commissioner

United States Tax Court · Decided December 18, 1952 · Opper

19 T.C. 486; 1952 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 17

Cases that cite this one

23 later published cases cite this decision. The 22 that cite it most often are listed here.

Gum Products, Inc. v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1962)
Estate of Trompeter v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1998)
ARC Electrical Constr. Co. v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1990)
Stewart v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1976)
Breman v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1976)
Bennett v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1958)
Rictor v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1956)
George M. Still, Inc. v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1953)
Goldring v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1953)
Auerbach Shoe Co. v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1953)
Estate of Emanuel Trompeter, Robin Carol Trompeter Gonzalez and Janet Ilene Trompeter Polacheck, Co-Executors v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1998)
Arc Electrical Construction Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (2d Cir. 1991)
American Insulation Corp. v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1985)
Esquire Motors, Inc. v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1969)
Estate of Slater v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1962)
A. C. Willingham v. United States (5th Cir. 1961)
Lowy v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1960)
Simon v. Commissioner (8th Cir. 1957)
Romm v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1956)
Winer v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1954)
Zwyns v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1954)
Norman H. Marshall v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1953)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

P. C. and Ethel Petterson, Petitioners, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent

Petterson v. Commissioner

Docket No. 35873

United States Tax Court

19 T.C. 486; 1952 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 17;

December 18, 1952, Promulgated

*17 Decision will be entered for the respondent.

Original deficiency in income tax liability held proper base for computing 50 per cent fraud penalty, despite later reduction in tax deficiency due to loss carry-back from subsequent year. Nick v. Dunlap (C. A. 5), 185 F.2d 674, followed.

Seymour Wells, C. P. A., for the petitioners.

R. G. Harless, Esq., for the respondent.

Opper, Judge.

OPPER

*486 OPINION.

A deficiency for 1947 in addition to tax on account of fraud in the amount of $ 4,475.32 is the sole controversy. There *487 is no question as to the existence of fraud and the sole issue is one of law. It is whether the amount of the 50 per cent fraud penalty is to be computed on the original deficiency or on the smaller sum admittedly reduced by a net loss carry-back from a subsequent year.

All of the facts have been stipulated and are hereby found accordingly. Petitioners' returns for 1947 and for 1949, the net-loss year, were filed with the collector for the district of Utah. The computations of the fraud penalty on the conflicting theories presented, as stipulated, are as follows:

Computation of Deficiency -- 1947

	Before carryback	After carryback
	loss	loss
Net income	$ 48,169.15	$ 34,209.77
Less exemptions	2,500.00	2,500.00

Income subject to normal tax and surtax	$ 45,669.15	$ 31,709.77

Tentative combined normal tax and surtax	23,701.79	14,280.06
Less 5 per cent reduction	1,185.09	714.00

Total income tax	22,516.70	13,566.06
Income tax liability per return	2,076.71	2,076.71

Deficiency	$ 20,439.99	$ 11,489.35

50 per cent penalty -- Sec. 293 (b), I. R. C.	$ 10,219.99	$ 5,744.67

*18 Although the question is novel in the Tax Court, the precise problem was disposed of in Nick v. Dunlap, an unreported opinion (June 22, 1950) of the District Court for the Northern District of Texas, 1950-5 C. C. H. para. 9436, 1950-4 P. H. para. 73236, which was affirmed (C. A. 5), , on authority of ; and certiorari was denied, . That decision held that the original deficiency, undiminished by the subsequent loss carry-back, was the proper base for computing the 50 per cent addition to tax for fraud. Petitioner does not attempt to distinguish the case. On its authority,

Decision will be entered for the respondent.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.