United States Supreme Court Cases & Opinions

U.S. Supreme Court

Helvering v. Butterworth, 290 U.S. 365 (1933)

Helvering v. Butterworth

No. 75

Argued November 13, 1933

Decided December 11, 1933*

290 U.S. 365

Syllabus

1. Section 219 of the Revenue Acts of 1924 and 1926, and §§ 161 and 162 of the Revenue Act of 1928, evince a general purpose of

Page 290 U. S. 366

the Congress to tax in some way the whole income of trust estates, and it was not intended that any income from a trust should escape taxation unless definitely exempted. P. 290 U. S. 360.

2. A widow who elects to take under her husband's will, and receives part or all of the income from an established trust in lieu of her statutory rights, is a "beneficiary" within the meaning of § 219 of the Revenue Acts of 1924 and 1926 and §§ 161 and 162 of the Revenue Act of 1928, and, in computing the net income of the trust, the amounts paid to her are deductible as income distributed to beneficiaries. Warner v. Walsh, 15 F.2d 367; United States v. Bolster, 26 F.2d 760, and Alen v. Brandeis, 29 F.2d 363, disapproved. P. 290 U. S. 369.

3. In computing the net income of an estate or trust under the Revenue Acts of 1924 and 1926, annuity payments made to a widow who elected to take under her husband's will in lieu of her statutory rights, the annuity being a charge upon the estate as a whole and not necessarily dependent upon income, are not deductible under § 219 as income distributed to a beneficiary. Burnet v. Whitehouse, 283 U. S. 148. P. 290 U. S. 370.

63 F.2d 621, 944, 949, affirmed.

63 F.2d 948, reversed.

Writs of certiorari, 289 U.S. 722, 723, to review judgments reversing decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals (23 B.T.A. 838, 846; 25 id. 1359) which sustained the action of the Commissioner in disallowing deductions and assessing deficiency taxes in four cases involving income taxes.

Page 290 U. S. 367