Question

In: Accounting

Brief the following Cases: Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189 (1920) Cheek v. U.S. 498 U.S....

Brief the following Cases:

Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189 (1920)

Cheek v. U.S. 498 U.S. 192 (1991)

Solutions

Expert Solution

Cheek v, U.S 498 U.S 192 91991)

Held:

1. A good-faith misunderstanding of the law or a good-faith belief that one is not violating the law negates willfulness, whether or not the claimed belief or misunderstanding is objectively reasonable. Statutory willfulness, which protects the average citizen from prosecution for innocent mistakes made due to the complexity of the tax laws, United States v. Murdock, 290 U. S. 389, is the voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty. United States v. Pomponio, 429 U. S. 10. Thus, if the jury credited Cheek's assertion that he truly believed that the Code did not treat wages as income, the Government would not have carried its burden to prove willfulness, however unreasonable a court might deem such a belief. Characterizing a belief as objectively unreasonable transforms what is normally a factual inquiry into a legal one, thus preventing a jury from considering it. And forbidding a jury to consider evidence that might negate willfulness would raise a serious question under the Sixth Amendment's jury trial provision, which this interpretation of the statute avoids. Of course, in deciding whether to credit Cheek's claim, the jury is free to consider any admissible evidence showing that he had knowledge of his legal duties.

Syllabus

Petitioner Cheek was charged with six counts of willfully failing to file a federal income tax return in violation of § 7203 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) and three counts of willfully attempting to evade his income taxes in violation of § 7201. Although admitting that he had not filed his returns, he testified that he had not acted willfully because he sincerely believed, based on his indoctrination by a group believing that the federal tax system is unconstitutional and his own study, that the tax laws were being unconstitutionally enforced and that his actions were lawful. In instructing the jury, the court stated that an honest but unreasonable belief is not a defense, and does not negate willfulness, and that Cheek's beliefs that wages are not income and that he was not a taxpayer within the meaning of the Code were not objectively reasonable. It also instructed the jury that a person's opinion that the tax laws violate his constitutional rights does not constitute a good-faith misunderstanding of the law. Cheek was convicted, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.

Eisner v. macomber 252 U.S 189 ( 1920)

Syllabus

Congress was not empowered by the Sixteenth Amendment to tax, as income of the stockholder, without apportionment, a stock dividend made lawfully and in good faith against profits accumulated by the corporation since March 1, 1913. P. 252 U. S. 201. Towne v. Eisner, 245 U. S. 418.

The Revenue Act of September 8, 1916, c. 463, 39 Stat. 756, plainly evinces the purpose of Congress to impose such taxes, and is to that extent in conflict with Art. I, § 2, cl. 3, and Art. I, § 9, cl. 4, of the Constitution. Pp. 252 U. S. 199, 252 U. S. 217.

These provisions of the Constitution necessarily limit the extension, by construction, of the Sixteenth Amendment. P. 252 U. S. 205.

What is or is not "income" within the meaning of the Amendment must be determined in each case according to truth and substance, without regard to form. P. 252 U. S. 206.

Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined, including profit gained through sale or conversion of capital. P. 252 U. S. 207.

Mere growth or increment of value in a capital investment is not income; income is essentially a gain or profit, in itself, of exchangeable value, proceeding from capital, severed from it, and derived or received by the taxpayer for his separate use, benefit, and disposal.

A stock dividend, evincing merely a transfer of an accumulated surplus to the capital account of the corporation, takes nothing from the property of the corporation and adds nothing to that of the shareholder; a tax on such dividends is a tax an capital increase, and not on income, and, to be valid under the Constitution, such taxes must be apportioned according to population in the several states.


Related Solutions

Brief the following case Cheek v. U.S. 498 U.S. 192 (1991)
Brief the following case Cheek v. U.S. 498 U.S. 192 (1991)
3.9 Cases Burger King v. Rudzewicz Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz 471 U.S. 462 (U.S. Supreme...
3.9 Cases Burger King v. Rudzewicz Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz 471 U.S. 462 (U.S. Supreme Court 1985) Summary Burger King Corp. is a Florida corporation with principal offices in Miami. It principally conducts restaurant business through franchisees. The franchisees are licensed to use Burger King’s trademarks and service marks in standardized restaurant facilities. Rudzewicz is a Michigan resident who, with a partner (MacShara) operated a Burger King franchise in Drayton Plains, Michigan. Negotiations for setting up the franchise occurred...
ECO - 252 - Macroeconomics 1. In each of the following cases, Ceteris Paribus, specify what...
ECO - 252 - Macroeconomics 1. In each of the following cases, Ceteris Paribus, specify what happens to the unemployment rate (increases, decreases, or remains the same) and to the labor force participation rate (increases, decreases, or remains the same). a. Anna loses her job but does not look for another one because she decides to go back to school. b. Matt quits his current job to start a new job immediately. c. Linda has just graduated with a Bachelor's...
Case brief for Business Law Federal Baseball Club v. National League, 259 U.S. 200 (1922) FACT:?...
Case brief for Business Law Federal Baseball Club v. National League, 259 U.S. 200 (1922) FACT:? ISSUE? RULE OF LAW? COURT'S REASONING ? CONCLUSION? Source?
Consider the market for automobiles in the U.S. Explain how each of the following cases will...
Consider the market for automobiles in the U.S. Explain how each of the following cases will affect the equilibrium quantity and equilibrium price of automobiles the U.S. auto market. a. The stock market boomed and automobile is a normal good for a typical U.S. consumer b. Auto insurance rates increases and wages of auto workers increases as well. c. More and safer interstate highways are built and Ford exit the U.S. market to serve only European and African markets. d....
Prepare a comprehensive and thumbnail brief of each of the following opinions: United States v. Kovel...
Prepare a comprehensive and thumbnail brief of each of the following opinions: United States v. Kovel Brown v. Hammond
What was the historical significance of the following 4 cases: Scott v Samford Yick Wo vs...
What was the historical significance of the following 4 cases: Scott v Samford Yick Wo vs Hopkins, Ex Parte Milligan Ex Parte Quirin. Was the Court correct in either case? Why or why not? Please explain. IMPORTANT- Please DO NOT just summarize the cases in your response but provide some analysis based on the cases.
read and brief the following case Kahler v. Commisioner 18 TC 31 (TC 1952)
read and brief the following case Kahler v. Commisioner 18 TC 31 (TC 1952)
Discuss the basic principles that the following cases establish: (i) Macaura v Northern Assurance Co. Ltd...
Discuss the basic principles that the following cases establish: (i) Macaura v Northern Assurance Co. Ltd [1925] AC 619 (ii) Luguterah v Northern Engineering Co. Ltd [1972] 1 GLR 153
1. Find and read the following cases Jones v. Free Flight Sport Aviation , Inc. 623...
1. Find and read the following cases Jones v. Free Flight Sport Aviation , Inc. 623 P.370, Web 1981 Colo. Lexis 571, Supreme Court of Colorado. Flood v. Fidelity & Guaranty Life Insurance Co. 394 So 2d 1311; Web 1981 La App Lexis 3538 Court of Appeal of Louisiana. 2. Answer the following questions Should a person be allowed to disaffirm a contract he or she made as a minor after reaching the age of minority? What is a reasonable...
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT