rities
issued," with the result that "the proportional interest of the
stockholder after the distribution of the new securities was deemed to
be exactly the same."
[22] Miles _v._ Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 259 U.S. 247 (1922).
[23] Koshland _v._ Helvering, 298 U.S. 441 (1936)
[24] Helvering _v._ Gowran, 302 U.S. 238 (1937).
[25] Helvering _v._ National Grocery Co., 304 U.S. 282, 288-289 (1938).
In Helvering _v._ Mitchell, 303 U.S. 391 (1938) the defendant contended
the collection of 50% of any deficiency in addition to the deficiency
alleged to have resulted from a fraudulent intent to evade the income
tax amounted to the imposition of a criminal penalty. The Court,
however, described the additional sum as a civil and not a criminal
sanction, and one which could be constitutionally employed to safeguard
the Government against loss of revenue. In contrast, the exaction upheld
in Helvering _v._ National Grocery Co., though conceded to possess the
attributes of a civil sanction, was declared to be sustainable as a tax.
[26] 311 U.S. 46 (1940). _See also_ Crane-Johnson Co. _v._ Helvering,
311 U.S. 54 (1940).
[27] 311 U.S. 46, 53. Another provision of the Revenue Act, requiring
undistributed net income of a foreign personal holding company to be
included in the gross income of citizens or residents who are
shareholders in such company, was upheld as constitutional in Rodney
_v._ Hoey, 53 F. Supp. 604, 607-608 (1944).
[28] Farmers Union Co-op Co. _v._ Commissioner of Int. Rev., 90 F. (2d)
488, 491, 492 (1937).
[29] Burk-Waggoner Oil Asso. _v._ Hopkins, 269 U.S. 110 (1925).
[30] 268 U.S. 628 (1925).
[31] Texas & P. Ry. Co. _v._ United States, 286 U.S. 285, 289 (1932);
Continental Tie & Lumber Co. _v._ United States, 286 U.S. 290 (1932).
[32] Helvering _v._ Bruun, 309 U.S. 461, 468-469 (1940). _See also_
Hewitt Realty Co. _v._ Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 76 F. (2d) 880
(1935).
[33] Crane _v._ Commissioner, 331 U.S. 1, 15-16 (1947).
[34] The donor could not, "by mere gift, enable another to hold this
stock free from * * * the right of the sovereign to take part of any
increase in its value when separated through sale or conversion and
reduced to possession."--Taft _v._ Bowers, 278 U.S. 470, 482, 484
(1929).
[35] Helvering _v._ Horst, 311 U.S. 112, 115-116 (1940).
[36] Bowers _v._ Kerbaugh-Empire Co., 271 U.S. 170 (1926).
[37] Goodrich _v._ Edwards, 255 U.S. 527 (1921).
[38] Ibid. _See
|