EDWARD W. BOUCHER AND GLORIA D. BOUCHER, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE

9th Cir. | 1982-11-26
No. 81-7724
Before KENNEDY and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges and JAMESON, District Judge.
693 F.2d 98 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1982)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court affirmed the Tax Court's decision that insurance premium discounts constituted illegal rebates under Washington law, making them non-deductible business expenses.


Facts & Procedural History

Edward W. Boucher, a life insurance agent, provided 'premium discounts' to his customers. The Tax Court found these discounts violated Washington's re…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Edward W. Boucher, a life insurance agent, and his wife appeal from a decision of the Tax Court, 77 T.C. 214 (1981), holding that Boucher gave insurance “premium discounts” to his customers during 1974 and 1975 in violation of the “rebate” statute of the State of Washington; that the statute was “generally enforced” within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. (I.R.C.1954) § 162(c)(2); and that the premium discounts accordingly were not deductible as business expenses under § 162(a).

In Alex v. C.I.R., 628 F. 2d 1222 (9 Cir. 1980), this court affirmed a similar holding of the Tax Court construing a California rebate statute. We noted that opinions of the Tax Court reflect its special expertise and should not be overruled “unless some unmistakable question of law mandates such a decision,” quoting from Sibla v. Commissioner, 611 F. 2d 1260, 1262 (9 Cir.1980). Id. at 1226.

We conclude that the findings of the Tax Court are not clearly erroneous and that its opinion is a well reasoned and correct statement of the law. We adopt it as the opinion of this court.

AFFIRMED.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw