Maestre v. Commissioner
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- Young v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1983)
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
*18
Petitioners, citizens of the United States residing in Puerto Rico, received compensation for services rendered to the Veterans' Administration, an agency of the United States Government.
*337 OPINION
Respondent determined a deficiency in the amount of $ 378.43 in petitioners' Federal income taxes for 1975. The only issue for decision is whether, under
All the facts have been stipulated. The stipulation of facts, together with the exhibits attached thereto, are incorporated herein by this reference.
Petitioners Ada N. Maestre (hereinafter Ada) and her husband, Bernardo L. La Fontaine (hereinafter Bernardo), were legal residents of Puerto Rico when they filed their petition. Throughout 1975, the year in controversy, they were bona fide residents*20 of Puerto Rico and citizens of the United States. Petitioners were married in Puerto Rico on August 2, 1975. They filed a joint Puerto Rican income tax return for 1975. They also filed a joint Federal income tax return for 1975 with the Internal Revenue Service Center, Philadelphia, Pa.
During 1975, Ada received $ 8,684.80 for services performed in Puerto Rico as an employee of the Veterans' Administration, an agency of the United States. Respondent has conceded on brief that one-half of the income received by Ada after her marriage *338 on August 2, 1975, is attributable to her husband under Puerto Rico's community property laws and thus, is exempt from taxation under
*22 Petitioners, however, argue that
Fully recognizing the principle of government by consent,
Petitioners contend that the "Compact" prohibits the imposition of Federal income taxes upon Puerto Rican residents. Thus, they conclude, enforcement of
*339 The "Compact" called for the creation of the Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the adoption of a Puerto Rican constitution. Generally, however, the "Compact" does not prevent Congress from exercising similar authority over Puerto Rico that Congress exercises over the States.
Although
*25 Petitioners also argue that
Petitioners' argument that
To reflect the foregoing,
Footnotes
1. All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as in effect during the tax year in issue, unless otherwise noted.↩
2.
Sec. 933 provides in pertinent part:The following items shall not be included in gross income and shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle:
(1) Resident of puerto rico for entire taxable year. -- In the case of an individual who is a bona fide resident of Puerto Rico during the entire taxable year, income derived from sources within Puerto Rico (except amounts received for services performed as an employee of the United States or any agency thereof); but such individual shall not be allowed as a deduction from his gross income any deductions (other than the deduction under
section 151↩ , relating to personal exemptions) properly allocable to or chargeable against amounts excluded from gross income under this paragraph.3.
48 U.S.C. sec. 734 provides:The statutory laws of the United States not locally inapplicable, except as hereinbefore or hereinafter otherwise provided, shall have the same force and effect in Puerto Rico as in the United States, except the internal revenue laws other than those contained in the Philippine Trade Act of 1946 or the Philippine Trade Agreement Revision Act of 1955:
Provided, however↩ , That after May 1, 1946, all taxes collected under the internal revenue laws of the United States on articles produced in Puerto Rico and transported to the United States, or consumed in the island shall be covered into the Treasury of Puerto Rico.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.