Gregory caused a new corporation to be formed, transferred appreciated stock to it, then liquidated it to obtain the stock at capital gains rates.

E302256

Helvering v. Gregory is a landmark 1935 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that transactions lacking economic substance beyond tax avoidance can be disregarded for tax purposes.

All labels observed (1)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (41)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
landmark case ⓘ
tax law case ⓘ
appliesTo federal income tax transactions lacking economic substance ⓘ
areaOfLaw federal income tax law ⓘ
citation 293 U.S. 465 ⓘ
citedFor the proposition that sham transactions may be ignored for tax purposes ⓘ
the requirement of a bona fide business purpose in tax-free reorganizations ⓘ
country United States of America ⓘ
surface form: United States
court Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate 1935 ⓘ
establishedPrinciple business purpose doctrine in tax law ⓘ
economic substance doctrine in tax law ⓘ
substance over form doctrine in tax law ⓘ
holding a transaction with no business purpose or economic substance beyond tax avoidance may be disregarded for tax purposes ⓘ
impact became a foundational precedent for the economic substance doctrine ⓘ
frequently cited in U.S. tax litigation ⓘ
influenced later codification of economic substance in the Internal Revenue Code ⓘ
jurisdiction United States of America ⓘ
surface form: United States
keyFactPattern taxpayer caused a new corporation to be formed ⓘ
taxpayer received the appreciated stock upon liquidation ⓘ
taxpayer transferred appreciated stock to the new corporation ⓘ
the new corporation was then liquidated ⓘ
languageOfOpinion English ⓘ
legalIssue whether a corporate reorganization lacking business purpose qualifies for tax-free treatment ⓘ
opinionBy Justice George Sutherland ⓘ
petitioner Guy T. Helvering ⓘ
surface form: Guy T. Helvering, Commissioner of Internal Revenue
reasoning a transaction that is a mere device to avoid tax does not qualify as a statutory reorganization ⓘ
the reorganization provisions were intended to apply only to transactions undertaken for reasons germane to the business ⓘ
relatedConcept Internal Revenue Code ⓘ
surface form: Internal Revenue Code reorganization provisions

capital gains ⓘ
corporate reorganization ⓘ
dividends ⓘ
tax avoidance ⓘ
tax evasion ⓘ
respondent Evelyn F. Gregory ⓘ
standsFor tax consequences are determined by the substance of a transaction, not merely its form ⓘ
taxpayers may arrange their affairs to minimize tax, but must respect the requirements of the tax statute ⓘ
taxObjective to obtain capital gains treatment instead of ordinary income or dividend treatment ⓘ
timePeriod Great Depression ⓘ
surface form: Great Depression era
unanimousDecision true ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Helvering v. Gregory → factualBackground → Gregory caused a new corporation to be formed, transferred appreciated stock to it, then liquidated it to obtain the stock at capital gains rates. ⓘ