1938 BTA LEXIS 880 | B.T.A. | 1938
Lead Opinion
The only question involved in this proceeding is whether or not the proceeds of the life insurance policy paid to petitioner by reason of the death of Eskridge are to be included in petitioner’s gross income. In section 22 (b) (1) of the Revenue Act of 1928
The respondent contends that the petitioner did give valuable consideration for the contract in 1930 and that the consideration so given was the $75,000 paid by him in 1927 for his stock in the Lambeth-Eskridge Motor Co. The respondent further contends that the stock became worthless in 1930, prior to the taxable year, and that peti
While it is true that the petitioner, in purchasing the stock in the Lambeth-Eskridge Motor Co., did not contract specifically for the insurance policy on the life of Eskridge and most likely had no thought of acquiring such a policy when he paid for his stock, it is nevertheless true that the consideration paid by him for the stock constituted consideration not only for the stock but also for any distributions to which he might become entitled as a stockholder. Accordingly, we can reach no other conclusion than that the petitioner received the insurance policy by reason of his ownership of stock in the corporation, and, if so, the $75,000 paid for the stock and the rights flowing therefrom constituted consideration for the insurance contract here in question. But even so, this conclusion does not benefit the respondent, for while section 22 (b) (2), supra, does definitely provide that the proceeds of a life insurance contract acquired for a valuable consideration are not unqualifiedly to be excluded from gross income, it also and as definitely provides that where the contract is acquired for valuable consideration the actual value of such consideration is to be excluded in determining the amount of the proceeds which is to be included in gross income. Accordingly, if the valuable consideration given for the transfer of the life insurance contract was the $75,000 in cash paid by the petitioner for the stock of the corporation, as the respondent himself claims, the exclusion of the actual value of such consideration as the statute requires leaves no amount to be included in petitioner’s gross income. According to the record the petitioner has received nothing from the corporation for the $75,000 so paid except the bare stock certificates and the insurance policies and by the end of the taxable year it was known that he would never receive anything more. The fact that the petitioner might be permitted a deduction in some year by reason of the worthlessness of the corporate stock does not change the situation, for Congress has seen fit to deal specifically with the proceeds of life insurance contracts and we must apply the statute as it is enacted. It is also true that in the case of property acquired by a stockholder as a distribution from a corporation, other than a divi
Decision will he entered for the petitioner.
SEC. 22. GROSS INCOME.
*******
(b) Exclusions from gross income. — The following items shall not be included in gross income and shall be exempt from taxation under this title:
(1) Life insurance. — Amounts received under a life insurance contract paid by reason of the death of the insured, whether in a single sum or in installments (but if such amounts are held by the insurer under an agreement to pay interest thereon, the interest payments shall be included in gross income).
(2) Annuities, etc. — * * *. In the case of a transfer for valuable consideration, by assignment or otherwise, of a life insurance, endowment, or annuity contract, or any interest therein, only the actual, value of such consideration and the amount of the premiums and other sums subsequently paid by the transferee shall be exempt from taxation under paragraph (1) or this paragraph.