Helvering v. Gregory

E62216

Helvering v. Gregory is a landmark 1935 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that transactions must have a genuine business purpose beyond tax avoidance to be respected for tax purposes.

AI illustration

How this image was made

AI-generated illustration of Helvering v. Gregory

This AI-generated illustration was produced by black-forest-labs/FLUX.2-dev (1024x1024) from a prompt written by openai/gpt-oss-120b from the entity's label + description.

Prompt

Generate an image of Helvering v. Gregory (Helvering v. Gregory is a landmark 1935 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that transactions must have a genuine business purpose beyond tax avoidance to be respected for tax purposes.)

All labels observed (2)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (47)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
landmark case ⓘ
tax law case ⓘ
arguedDate 1934-11-14 ⓘ
category United States Supreme Court cases in 1935 ⓘ
United States corporate taxation case law ⓘ
United States taxation and revenue case law ⓘ
citation 293 U.S. 465 ⓘ
court Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate 1935-01-07 ⓘ
decisionType unanimous decision ⓘ
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. ⓘ
fullName Helvering v. Gregory, 293 U.S. 465 (1935) ⓘ
holding A transaction must have a genuine business purpose beyond tax avoidance to be respected for tax purposes. ⓘ
A transaction that complies with the literal language of the statute may still be disregarded if it is a mere device to avoid tax. ⓘ
impact Became a foundational case for the business purpose requirement in U.S. tax law. ⓘ
Frequently cited in tax planning and tax litigation involving avoidance schemes. ⓘ
Influenced later development of the economic substance doctrine. ⓘ
issue Whether a purported corporate reorganization undertaken solely to avoid tax qualified as a reorganization under the Revenue Act. ⓘ
jurisdiction United States ⓘ
keyConcept economic substance ⓘ
sham transaction ⓘ
tax-motivated reorganization ⓘ
languageOfOpinion English ⓘ
legalArea corporate reorganization ⓘ
federal income tax law ⓘ
tax avoidance ⓘ
lowerCourtJudge Learned Hand ⓘ
opinionBy Justice George Sutherland ⓘ
originatingJurisdiction United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ⓘ
partyRole Gregory was a taxpayer and shareholder. ⓘ
Helvering was the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. ⓘ
linked to: Guy T. Helvering
petitioner Guy T. Helvering, Commissioner of Internal Revenue ⓘ
linked to: Guy T. Helvering
precedentFor cases evaluating whether transactions have a legitimate non-tax business purpose. ⓘ
principleEstablished business purpose doctrine ⓘ
substance over form doctrine in tax law ⓘ
reasoning The Court looked to the substance of the transaction rather than its formal compliance with statutory language. ⓘ
The reorganization provisions were intended to apply only to transactions undertaken for reasons germane to the business. ⓘ
relatedDoctrine economic substance doctrine ⓘ
step transaction doctrine ⓘ
substance over form ⓘ
reporter United States Reports ⓘ
respondent Evelyn F. Gregory ⓘ
result Judgment of the Second Circuit affirmed. ⓘ
statuteInterpreted Revenue Act of 1928 ⓘ
volume 293 ⓘ
year 1935 ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (6)

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

Guy T. Helvering → notableWork → Helvering v. Gregory ⓘ
Helvering v. Gregory → fullName → Helvering v. Gregory, 293 U.S. 465 (1935) ⓘ
linked to: Helvering v. Gregory
Learned Hand → notableWork → Helvering v. Gregory ⓘ
Gregory → partyInCase → Helvering v. Gregory ⓘ
Evelyn F. Gregory → hasLegalCase → Helvering v. Gregory ⓘ
Evelyn F. Gregory → partyTo → Helvering v. Gregory ⓘ