Chertoff v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

5 Citing cases

  1. Richards v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

    19 T.C. 366 (U.S.T.C. 1952)   Cited 2 times

    As he was the president of each corporation, both before and after the trusts were created, the voting rights which he retained could be used to advance or benefit his own economic interest, particularly in maintaining the aggregate salary, in the amount of close to $600 per week, payable to himself, as president, and to one person serving directly under him, the maximum provided in the November 22, 1934, agreement. Cf. Helvering v. Clifford, supra; M. Friedman, 7 T.C. 54; Lillian R. Chertoff, 6 T.C. 266, affd. 160 F.2d 691. The right to vote stock has been regarded as one of the major rights of ownership entitled to considerable weight.

  2. Shapero v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

    8 T.C. 104 (U.S.T.C. 1947)   Cited 1 times

    Whether a settlor-trustee's power to distribute or accumulate income for some specified number of years, coupled with broad powers to manage the corpus, the be sufficient in itself to invoke the Clifford rule, we need not here determine. See Leslie H. Green, supra; M. Friedman, 7 T.C. 54; and Lillian R. Chertoff, 6 T.C. 266, and compare with Hall v. Commissioner, 150 Fed.(2d) 304, reversing 4 T.C. 506; David L. Loew, supra; W. L. Taylor, 6 T.C. 201, and Alma M. Myer, supra. We do think that the retention of such a power may and did here make possible the settlor's continued economic benefit from the income of the property formally dedicated to the trust.

  3. Green v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

    7 T.C. 263 (U.S.T.C. 1946)   Cited 17 times

    ‘ He had discretionary power to accumulate or distribute the income, and if his wife or son died before the time fixed for the termination of the trusts he could deprive them of both income and corpus, although each was stated to be the primary beneficiary of the respective trusts. Cf. Lillian R. Chertoff, 6 T.C. 266. In the Myer and Taylor cases, supra, relied upon by the petitioner, the powers retained by the settlor-trustee were substantially less than those retained in the proceedings before us.

  4. Wheelock v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

    7 T.C. 98 (U.S.T.C. 1946)   Cited 3 times

    It is enough that we find in the present case that the taxpayer, in point of substance, has parted with no substantial interest in property, other than the specified payments of income which, like other gifts of income, are taxable to the donor. See also, Henry F. Haldeman, 6 T.C. 266; Anna Morgan, 5 T.C. 1089; Morris Eisenberg, 5 T.C. 856. Petitioner, with means beyond his needs, adopted the method of transferring stock in his family-owned corporate business to trusts for the accumulation in the trusts, rather than in himself, of large dividends from the stock, but he retained, in spite of the transfers of bare legal title to the stock, powers in the corporation which ordinarily accrue to the owner of stock.

  5. Friedman v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

    7 T.C. 54 (U.S.T.C. 1946)   Cited 3 times

    The situation strongly suggests an instance of retention of corporate control by means of the creation of trusts. Anna Morgan, supra; Frederick B. Rentschler, 1 T.C. 814; Lillian R. Chertoff, 6 T.C. 266. The trusts in question are long term trusts, to extend over twenty years, unless a trust is sooner terminated by the death of a beneficiary.