Summary

Thurgood Marshall,  Cottage Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ Rather than assessing tax liability on the basis of annual fluctuations in the value of a taxpayer's property, the Internal Revenue Code defers the tax consequences of a gain or loss in property value until the taxpayer "realizes" the gain or loss. The realization requirement is implicit in § 1001 (a) of the Code, 26 U.S.C. § 1001 (a) , which defines " [t] he gain [or loss] from the sale or other disposition of property" as the difference between "the amount realized" from the sale or disposition of the property and its "adjusted basis." ”
Source: Wikisource

Thurgood Marshall,  Cottage Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ We hold that such a transaction does give rise to realized losses.
* Petitioner Cottage Savings Association (Cottage Savings) is a savings and loan association (S & L) formerly regulated by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) . [1] Like many S & L's, Cottage Savings held numerous long-term, low-interest mortgages that declined in value when interest rates surged in the late 1970's. These institutions would have benefited from selling their devalued mortgages in order to realize tax-deductible losses.
”
Source: Wikisource

Thurgood Marshall,  Cottage Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ Moreover, the complexity of the Commissioner's approach ill serves the goal of administrative convenience that underlies the realization requirement. In order to apply the Commissioner's test in a principled fashion, the Commissioner and the taxpayer must identify the relevant market, establish whether there is a regulatory agency whose views should be taken into account, and then assess how the relevant market participants and the agency would view the transaction. ”
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature