Chamberlin v. Commissioner
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
207 F.2d 462 (1953)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
The Metal Moulding Corporation (Metal) had only common stock outstanding. Metal also had a large earned surplus. Metal did not want to distribute the surplus by issuing a cash dividend because such a dividend would have been taxable income to its shareholders (plaintiffs). To avoid those taxes, Metal negotiated a series of transactions with two insurance companies. Under the plan, Metal issued a stock dividend on its common shares in the form of a new class of preferred stock. The Metal shareholders shortly thereafter, and also according to the plan, sold the preferred stock to the insurance companies for cash. As a result of the transactions, (1) Metal reduced its earned surplus by the value of the issued preferred shares, (2) the original Metal common shareholders ended up with cash in hand, and (3) the insurance companies became the holders of the preferred stock. The common shareholders reported income as long-term capital gain from the sale of the preferred stock to the insurance companies. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (defendant) assessed a deficiency, determining that, despite its form, the series of transactions was, in reality, a cash dividend out of Metal’s earnings to its shareholders. Accordingly, the IRS treated the common shareholders as having received a taxable dividend equal to the cash they ultimately received. The common shareholders filed suit in the United States Tax Court, which upheld the deficiency. The common shareholders appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Miller, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.