Zarin v. Commissioner case brief
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
916 F.2d 110,1990 U.S. App. 17775, 90-2
U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P50,530; 66 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5679
CASE SYNOPSIS: Appellants, a taxpayer
and his wife, sought review of the decision of the United States Tax
Court holding that taxpayer recognized income from discharge of
indebtedness resulting from his gambling activities and that he
should be taxed on the income.
FACTS: Appellant taxpayer was extended gambling credit by casino and became a compulsive gambler. The state casino control commissioner issued an emergency order making further extension of credit to the taxpayer illegal, but the casino continued to extend credit. The taxpayer ran up a debt in excess of three million dollars and the casino filed suit to collect. The taxpayer stated that the debt was unenforceable under state law, and the matter settled for $ 500,000.00. The Internal Revenue Service asserted that the forgiven portion of the contested debt was income to the taxpayer and imposed tax. The tax court agreed and the taxpayer appealed. The court reversed the tax court's decision and remanded the matter on the grounds that the taxpayer realized no income tax by reason of his settlement with a third party creditor.
CONCLUSION: Decision of the tax court was reversed and remanded because the taxpayer realized no income by reason of his settlement of his gambling debt with a third party creditor.
---
FACTS: Appellant taxpayer was extended gambling credit by casino and became a compulsive gambler. The state casino control commissioner issued an emergency order making further extension of credit to the taxpayer illegal, but the casino continued to extend credit. The taxpayer ran up a debt in excess of three million dollars and the casino filed suit to collect. The taxpayer stated that the debt was unenforceable under state law, and the matter settled for $ 500,000.00. The Internal Revenue Service asserted that the forgiven portion of the contested debt was income to the taxpayer and imposed tax. The tax court agreed and the taxpayer appealed. The court reversed the tax court's decision and remanded the matter on the grounds that the taxpayer realized no income tax by reason of his settlement with a third party creditor.
CONCLUSION: Decision of the tax court was reversed and remanded because the taxpayer realized no income by reason of his settlement of his gambling debt with a third party creditor.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment