John A. Nelson Co. v. Helvering
296 U.S. 374 (1935)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A transaction qualifies as a tax-deferred reorganization, rather than a taxable sale, when the seller corporation acquires a definite and substantial interest in the purchaser corporation, even if that interest is solely in the form of non-voting preferred stock.
Facts:
- Elliott-Fisher Corporation organized a new corporation ('New Co'), purchasing all its 30,000 shares of common stock for $2,000,000 cash.
- New Co then acquired substantially all the assets of John A. Nelson Co. (petitioner).
- In exchange, Nelson Co. received $2,000,000 cash and the entire issue of New Co's 12,500 shares of non-voting preferred stock.
- The preferred stock gave Nelson Co. no voting rights in New Co, except in the case of default.
- Nelson Co. used part of the cash to retire its own preferred shares.
- Nelson Co. then distributed the remaining cash and the New Co. preferred stock to its own stockholders.
- After the transaction, Nelson Co. retained its corporate franchise and approximately $100,000 in assets and remained liable for certain obligations.
Procedural Posture:
- The Commissioner of Internal Revenue assessed a deficiency income tax against John A. Nelson Co. for its 1926 tax year.
- John A. Nelson Co. challenged the assessment before the Board of Tax Appeals, which ruled against it, finding the transaction was not a reorganization.
- John A. Nelson Co. appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals, which affirmed the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the appellate court's decision.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a transaction where one corporation acquires substantially all the assets of another in exchange for cash and non-voting preferred stock qualify as a 'reorganization' under the Revenue Act of 1926, thus deferring the recognition of taxable gain?
Opinions:
Majority - Mr. Justice McReynolds
Yes, the transaction qualifies as a 'reorganization.' When a seller corporation acquires a definite and substantial interest in the affairs of the purchasing corporation, the transaction is a reorganization, not a mere sale. The Court reasoned that ownership of preferred stock, even without voting rights, constitutes a 'substantial interest' in the affairs of the issuing corporation. The statute defining reorganization does not require that the seller participate in the management of the buyer, acquire a controlling interest, or dissolve its own corporate existence. This situation is distinct from cases like Pinellas Ice Co. where the seller received only cash and short-term notes, which do not represent a continuing proprietary interest.
Analysis:
This decision significantly broadened the scope of the 'continuity of interest' doctrine, a judicial requirement for tax-free reorganizations. By holding that non-voting preferred stock constitutes a sufficient proprietary interest, the Court provided corporations with greater flexibility in structuring acquisitions. It clarified that the seller's continuing stake need not involve control or voting rights, shifting the focus to the nature of the consideration (an equity-like interest) rather than the power it confers. This precedent distinguishes a reorganization from a sale by confirming that as long as the seller retains a substantial equity stake, the transaction maintains the character of a continuing investment rather than a final sale.
Unlock the full brief for John A. Nelson Co. v. Helvering