Misplaced Pages

United States v. Drescher

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
American legal case

United States v. Drescher
CourtUnited States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Full case name United States v. Drescher
ArguedJanuary 5, 1950
DecidedFebruary 16, 1950
Citations179 F.2d 863; 50-1 USTC (CCH) ¶ 9186
Case history
Prior history84 F. Supp. 228 (W.D.N.Y. 1949)
Court membership
Judges sittingLearned Hand, Thomas Walter Swan, Charles Edward Clark
Case opinions
MajoritySwan, joined by Hand
Concur/dissentClark
Laws applied
Internal Revenue Code

United States v. Drescher, 179 F.2d 863 (2nd Cir. 1950) was a United States income tax case before the Second Circuit. The Court held as follows:

  • The annuities in question were nonassignable, and possession was retained by the employer until taxpayer reached age of retirement; and the employee's compensation was not reduced during these years, nor did he have election to receive in cash the amount paid.

Facts

A corporation, anticipating its executive's retirement, purchases an "endowment policy," entitling him (the policy-holder) to a lump-sum-certain when he retires in 15 years.

Held

The executive must include the premium immediately, as his "basis" for his new policy.

Academic commentary

The stakes for the government are as follows:

  • Due to the declining present value of future money, a taxpayer pays less in taxes if he can defer his tax payment.
  • In the case of this endowment policy:
    • If the Premium = $B, the will be $.
    • If deferral is permitted, the executive's tax savings = (marginal rate R)*
  • Reasons in favor of deferral: it was issued to the company in the interim; and, unlike the stock bonus above, his rights are nonforfeitable: he can't sell/borrow against it, nor can he be denied it by being fired.
  • Reasons against deferral: it names him as the beneficiary; he should feel better off at issuance—and he certainly consented to the policy purchase in lieu of salary (e.g. as consideration).

References

  1. United States v. Drescher, 179 F.2d 863 (2d. Cir. 1950).
  2. Chirelstein, Marvin (2005). Federal Income Taxation: A Law Student's Guide to the Leading Cases and Concepts (Tenth ed.). New York, NY: Foundation Press. pp. 16–17. ISBN 1-58778-894-2.

External links

Text of United States v. Drescher, 179 F.2d 863 (2nd Cir. 1950) is available from: Justia OpenJurist Google Scholar


Stub icon

This article relating to case law in the United States or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Stub icon

This tax-related article is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Categories: