Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S. 111 (1930)

Text

---

U.S. Supreme Court LUCAS v. EARL, 281 U.S. 111 (1930)

281 U.S. 111

LUCAS, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, v. EARL. No. 99. Argued March 3, 1930. Decided March 17, 1930.

The Attorney General and Mr. Charles E. Hughes, Jr., Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

Warren Olney, Jr., of San Francisco, Cal., for respondent.[ Lucas v. Earl 281 U.S. 111 (1930) ]

[Page 281 U.S. 111, 115]

provide that the tax could not be escaped by anticipatory arrangements and contracts however skilfully devised to prevent the salary when paid from vesting even for a second in the man who earned it. That seems to us the import of the statute before us and we think that no distinction can be taken according to the motives leading to the arrangement by which the fruits are attributed to a different tree from that on which they grew.

Judgment reversed.

The CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in this case.

---