[go: nahoru, domu]
Wikipedia

Welch v. Helvering: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
→‎top: add "use mdy dates" template
 
(25 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 1:
{{Use mdy dates|date=September 2023}}
{{More citations needed|date=November 2016}}
 
{{Infobox SCOTUS case
| Litigants = Welch v. Helvering
| ArgueDate = October 19
| ArgueYear = 1933
| DecideDate = November 6
| DecideYear = 1933
| FullName = Thomas Welch v. Guy T. Helvering, Commissioner of Internal Revenue
| USVol = 290
| USPage = 111
| ParallelCitations |Citation= 54 S. Ct. 8; 78 [[Lawyers' Edition|L. Ed.]] 212
| Docket =
|Prior=▼
| OralArgument =
|Subsequent=▼
| OralReargument =
|Holding=Welch's repayments of his discharged debts were not ordinary and necessary business expenses, and therefore not deductible under Sec. 162 of IRC.▼
| OpinionAnnouncement =
|SCOTUS=1932-1937
▲ | Prior =
|Majority=Cardozo▼
▲ | Subsequent =
|JoinMajority=▼
▲ | Holding = Welch's repayments of his discharged debts were not ordinary and necessary business expenses, and therefore not deductible under Sec.§ 162 of IRCthe Internal Revenue Code.
|Concurrence=▼
| SCOTUS =
|JoinConcurrence=▼
▲ | Majority = Cardozo
|Concurrence2=▼
▲ | JoinMajority = ''unanimous''
|JoinConcurrence2=▼
| Concurrence/Dissent =
| JoinConcurrence/Dissent =
▲ | Concurrence2 =
|Dissent=▼
▲ | JoinConcurrence2 =
|JoinDissent=▼
▲ | Concurrence/Dissent =
|Dissent2=▼
▲ | JoinConcurrence/Dissent =
|JoinDissent2=▼
▲ | Dissent =
|LawsApplied=
▲ | JoinDissent =
▲ | Dissent2 =
▲ | JoinDissent2 =
| LawsApplied = [[Internal Revenue Code]] [[Internal Revenue Code section 162(a)|§ 162(a)]]
}}
'''''Welch v. Helvering''''', [[Case citation|290 U.S. 111]] (1933), was a decision by the [[United States Supreme Court]] on the difference between business and personal expenses and the difference between ordinary business deductions and capital expenses. It is one of the most important [[income tax in the United States|income tax law]] cases.
 
==Background==
Thomas Welch and his father owned a grain brokerage business in Minnesota, thatwhich went bankrupt in 1922. Welch later reopened a business. but firstHe hadchose to repay his discharged debts. He then tried to deduct the repayments as business expenses, but the Commissioner ruled that these payments were not deductible from income as ordinary and necessary expenses in the course of business.
 
==Opinion of the Court==
[[Benjamin N. Cardozo]], delivering the Court's opinion, held that the expenses were too personal, were too bizarre to be ordinary, and were capital. He did not consider them "ordinary and necessary business expenses" and, therefore, not deductible under [[Internal Revenue Code section 162(a)|Section 162]] of the [[Internal Revenue Code]].
 
This case is frequently cited for its [[dictum]] describing the meaning of the term "necessary" in Section 162 as requiring that expenses merely be "appropriate and helpful [in] the development of the [taxpayer's] business." Cardozo submits that determining what constitutes a necessary expense can be enormously difficult: "life in all its fullness must supply the answer to the riddle."
 
The court also considered the question of whether Welch's expenses were current expenses or investments which should have been capitalized. Although the case was eventually decided on other grounds, the idea that the expenses should have increased the basis of the business as capital expenses, with no immediate deduction but the potential for depreciation losses over time may also have influenced the court.
 
==See also==
Line 40 ⟶ 51:
 
==Further reading==
*{{cite book |title=Tax stories: An in-depth look at ten leading federal income tax cases |chapter=The Story of ''Welch'': The Use (and Misuse) of the ‘Ordinary'Ordinary and Necessary’Necessary' Test for the Deductibility of Business Expenses |last=Newman |first=Joel S. |authorlink= |editor=Caron, Paul L. (ed.) |year=2002 |publisher=Foundation Press |location=New York |isbn=1-58778-403-3 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/taxstoriesindept0000unse/page/155 155–182] |chapter-url-access=registration |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/taxstoriesindept0000unse/page/155 }}
 
==External links==
*{{caselaw source
| case = ''Welch v. Helvering'', {{ussc|290|111|1933|el=no}}
| cornell =https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/290/111
| courtlistener =https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/102139/welch-v-helvering/
| findlaw = https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/290/111.html
| justia =https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/290/111/case.html
| googlescholar =https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7334265773541328249
| loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep290/usrep290111/usrep290111.pdf
}}
 
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Hughes Court]]
[[Category:United States taxation and revenue case law]]
[[Category:1933 in United States case law]]
Line 48 ⟶ 71:
 
{{SCOTUS-case-stub}}
{{Tax-stub}}
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welch_v._Helvering"