TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

W. L. Mead, Incorporated v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

W. L. MEAD, INCORPORATED, Petitioner-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee

W. L. Mead, Inc. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 551 F.2d 121 (6th Cir. 1977)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
March 11, 1977
Docket
No. 76-1236
Judges
Weick, Edwards, Lively
Citations
551 F.2d 12139 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 10081977 U.S. App. LEXIS 14356

Opinion

ORDER Appellant W. L. Mead, Inc., a motor freight company, appeals from a ruling of the United States Tax Court which held that in the taxable years 1967 and 1968 it accumulated earnings in excess of the reasonable needs of the business. The Tax Court found the deficiencies to be $65,-476.91 in 1967 and $15,058.37 in 1968.

This court’s reading of the Tax Court’s opinion analyzing taxpayer’s claimed justification for accumulated earnings indicates that it gave both careful consideration to every factual contention and that none of its findings of fact are clearly erroneous. This is particularly true since this case was considered against a background which showed without dispute that the taxpayer corporation was owned outright by W. L. Mead, and that between 1947 to the end of 1966 its earned surplus account had increased from $6,127 to $1,928,080, and that during all of those years, it had paid no dividends in any one year higher than $1,000.

Against this background, we find no need to analyze in detail the Tax Court’s handling of the 26 U.S.C. § 534 (1970) issue, since assuming the burden shifted to the Commissioner, as appellant claims, said burden was amply carried.

The judgment of the Tax Court is affirmed for these reasons and those found spelled out in the opinion of the Tax Court reported at T.C. Memo. 1975-215 (June 30, 1975).

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

  • (accounts receivable from shareholders, officers and employees included in Bardahl ↩ calculation because "such accounts do drain working capital from a business and may be a legitimate business activity")

Cited by 14 cases

View all citing references →
1977: 11978: 31979: 21981: 21984: 11985: 11986: 21988: 11998: 119772026peak 1978 · 3

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list