Owen J. Roberts

“ The taxpayer contends that if the test of taxability under Sections 210 and 211 is ownership, it is clear that income of community property is owner by the community and that husband and wife have each a present vested one-half interest therein. ”

“ The same policy dictates that third parties who deal with the husband respecting community property shall be assured that the wife shall not be permitted to nullify his transactions. The powers of partners, or of trustees of a spendthrift trust, furnish apt analogies.
The obligations of the husband as agent of the community are no less real because the policy of the State limits the wife's right to call him to account in a court. Power is not synonymous with right. ”

“ Moreover, we there pointed out that this accorded with the executive construction of the Act as to California.
The Corliss Case raised no issue as to the intent of Congress, but as to its power. We held that where a donor retains the power at any time to revest himself with the principal of the gift, Congress may declare that he still owns the income. While he has technically parted with title, yet he in fact retains ownership, and all its incidents. But here the husband never has ownership. That is in the community at the moment of acquisition. ”

“ The reasons for conferring such sweeping powers of management on the husband are not far to seek. Public policy demands that in all ordinary circumstances, litigation between wife and husband during the life of the community should be discouraged. ”

“ When the 1924 Act was introduced it contained the same provision, which was stricken out by the Ways and Means Committee and not reinserted.↑ Sec. 1212. 'Income from any period before January 1, 1925, of a marital commnit y in the income of which the wife has a vested interest as distinguished from an expectancy, shall be held to be correctly returned if returned by the spouse to whom the income belonged under the State law applicable to such marital community for such period. ”

“ In the Earl Case a husband and wife contracted that any property they had or might thereafter acquire in any way, either by earnings (including salaries, fees, etc.) , or any rights by contract or otherwise, 'shall be treated and considered, and hereby is declared to be received, held, taken, and owned by us as joint tenants. ”

“ The Commissioner urges that we have, in principle, decided the instant question in favor of the Government. He relies on United States v. Robbins, 269 U.S. 315, 46 S.C.t. 148, 70 L. Ed. 285; Corliss v. ”