DOCSLIB.ORG

Lybrand, Ross Bros. & Montgomery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lybrand, Ross Bros. & Montgomery FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY 1898 -1948: - Privately Printed LYBRAND, ROSS BROS. & 'MONTGOMERY This Issue of the L. R. B. &M. JOURNAL is Dedicated to the Founders of the Firm of LYBRAND, ROSS BROS. & MONTGOMERY by their Partners and Fellow Workers Table of Contents Foreword .......................... ' . .. ... 5 Fifty Years. 7 In Memoriam-Adam Averell Ross.... .. .. 13 Firm Meetings ............................. ' ..... 17 Opportunities Then and Now.. .. ......... 19 Professional Activities. .. 22 Contributions to the Literature of Accounting. 29 Nonprofessional Activities.. .. 35 World War 11...... .. 40 Some Effects of S. E. C. Legislation. 44 Staff Education, Selection and Training. .. 46 Staff Activities. 53 In Memoriam-Other Partners. .. .. 63 L. R. B. & M. JOURNAL. .. .. 68 A Few Unusual Engagements... .. 70 Published Articles of Lasting Interest. .. 86 Professional Standards. .. 87 To What Extent Can the Practice of Accounting Be Reduced to Rules and Standards? . 99 Ripley V. Winkle ..................................... 113 Professional Accounting Practice Today and Tomorrow. .. 121 The Certified Public Accountant on the Threshold of his Second Half Century. .. ............. 129 Epilogue-A Challenge... 138 Bibliography. 139 Foreword Every phase of the economic cycle has been encountered by the firm in the fifty years of its existence. There have been three wars, each accompanied by the artificial stimulus of war production, periods of normal prosperity, boom times, and at least three depres­ sions. Throughout these years there has been a steady growth in the accountancy profession with ever increasing responsibility. The requirements of credit grantors, investors and stock ex­ changes for the review of financial statements and the expression of opinion thereon by independent certified public accountants have vastly increased; we have seen the enactment of tax legislation undreamed of fifty years ago with its resulting impact upon the business world and the work of the accountant; federal and state securities laws have come into being; and a host of other develop­ ments have occurred, each tending to increase the responsibility o carried by the profession. Perfection has not been achieved by the accountant, nor will it ever be; the profession's continued growth, however, is dependent upon its continuous effort to achieve that goal. An outlook analogous to that held by the accounting profession was expressed by the late eminent jurist, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who, speaking of the legal profession, said: The truth is. that the law is always approaching, and never reaching, consistency. It is forever adopting new principles from life at one end, and it always retains old ones from history at the other, which have not yet been absorbed or sloughed off. It will become entirely consistent only when it ceases to grow. The firm has had its share in the growth of the profession. Our partners and staff members have participated in the promotion of accountancy education and by their writings have contributed to the literature of the profession. They have taken, and will continue to take, an active part in the functioning of state and national societies. T. EDWABO Ross ROBERT H. MONTGOMERY WILLIAM M. LYBRAND Asheville. North Carolina - September 1948 Fifty Years The firm of Lybrand, Ross Bros. & Montgomery was founded in Philadelphia on January 1, 1898. The four original members, who had been friends and associates for almost ten years, were William M. Lybrand, T. Edward Ross, Adam A. Ross and Robert H. Montgomery. All had been associated with the late John Heins, a pioneer public accountant in Philadelphia, and one of the ablest men in the accounting profession in the nation. Mr. Adam Ross died in 1929. It is most gratifying that the other founders have been able to carryon their association in the firm for five decades. At its inception the organization comprised the four partners, one staff member and a clerical assistant. The staff member, Joseph M. Pugh, became a partner in 1904. Duties of secretary, typist and bookkeeper were performed by the sister of the Ross brothers, Miss Lillian A. Ross, who retired forty-six years later. I r-~~ L? /. M,~ :':/--Z~uz~;~A~a, 314' ~-""'7 _/.,fy-' E (ibt (~intrll l!.tfr Jn611r.mn'.1\nnltit!! .f [~6t ([tUnvan~. 01 Jlllllflcholpilitt. X}?~/£Ph~»~i; J~.~ tI-,~ 1_:'7 C. ~, _h. 3>£... 0) 7-' ---- ~ HM. ---- :ff*.-t'h;/,'j' -Ifts- ~ __ ,_,"~;.-t.. ..... tt._~ ~ rl;l~..L' Two of the firm's earliest checks, which were drawn one month after its founding, are shown above, 8 FiJty Years The first check was to reimburse Mr. T. Edward Ross for expenses incurred by him and three assistants in traveling to and from Jeddo, Pennsylvania, for the account of G. B. Markle & Company. The second check was for the purchase oLstationery. Two small rooms in the Stephen Girard Building comprised the first office of the firm. Indicative of the furniture and equipment in use at that time is the inventory shown on page 9 which was taken by Mr. Adam A. Ross on April 1, 1898. The oak roll-top desk which was valued at $35 served the four partners, and the six-foot standing desk was for the use of the staff. On page 11 is pictured an inventory of the bQoks which comprised the firm's library, which inventory was also taken by Mr. Adam A. Ross on April 1, 1898. It is interesting to note that the only two publications on accounting were "The Accountant" for the years 1893 to 1896 and Volume I of "The American Accountants Manual." Contrast this modest collec­ tion with the many thousands of books in the libraries of our offices throughout the nation today! On June 1, 1902, the firm sent to its clients in Philadelphia an announcement of the forthcoming opening of an office in New York City. A copy of the announcement appears below: LYBRAND.ROSS BROS.& MONTGOMERY SI6-SI~ STEPHEN GIRARD BUILDING CERTIFIED PUBL.IC ACCOUNTANTS PHILADELPHIA I~!..JUNE 1902 0lf <r {(Ji af.kA:e, I ""7 ~ ~ drJt... - r.Kv- . ·5 tkLIZ c~ Jq 4.,A, d~ n.<--~~7 h.~ c-c..~ ,h~(l1 I~ l ·C&.4.k ~.J-. I ,.l<.r. dA"'~""'-<V<f ". J ., "'-"-.t. ~~·V":'-~ -,. , I ~ 0 I ().8.-1( . /<.CAr o-C--'1 t.- It.=""-.... "-"'- 1{" .. w,L... Ll/fH.<A.~~~t;. -I """'f,.c." eeL .J I q 2,.. , . .1 {)~tJ( {,./fo "", .. <-1£. ~ ~~ , ': • 5 I f~';-;- , " . (J. • I t", ,,~'/ A:,."-",,,­ 'tah.-tc ' ,fC 4,,/" ' .(, R . J. I JV~'" C""~'/ A .... ~ {" ~ ., I" _ ( t.. ~.J f-( (.j, I," & ! {" ,.~,< , /' n •. " '''/Li!..t..; " 8 . ~ ';r'W~+ 7 'f/~/i, :-. ...,. I- "-, '·r/".J'fl7 iw. r-~ .L I SfeLl '/-"_;' "(4. ~ I!#.<..a....~ , I /l.a.-I- "-~ '- ,.;- I ;; ....... vt ~....,-t..A<- I (I(,. .... ~-"..C!.(!f..... _4.1 ~J..../ Cec-<L{<. ( w~_(1£) ~~.f( ~ _ ",1...,J. ddt... _ l-L ....~ .) - Ce.....u._~el­ J.~",-£c ~,('~ ~f~' :~_Q,..v :L !>-.. - .~.;;t:; ':'~/J ,;) . j 1 r, I" 1/ i~ 3~F 7 '" ~- 10 Fifty Years The following September this office, consisting of one room, was opened at 25 Broad Street. Colonel Montgomery was both the "member of the firm" and the "force of assistants." In the following year, Miss Anna M. Storey was engaged as secretary, a post which she held for twenty-three years. She was succeeded by her sister, Miss Reba Storey, who retired in 1945 after serving the firm for twenty-eight years. By 1908 the members of the organization were traveling with increasing frequency to Pittsburgh; accordingly, the firm opened an office there under the management of Walter A. Staub. The next office to be established was in Chicago in 1909. Walter Beans of the Philadelphia staff was the first manager, and he was succeeded two years later by Mr. Staub, who was transferred. from Pittsburgh as resident partner. In 1915 the New England practice of the firm necessitated opening an office in Boston. Its first manager, later a partner, was Carl T. Keller, who was an important factor in its foundation and has con­ tributed much to its growth and success. In 1916 Homer N. Sweet became a member of the organization and less than three years later was admitted to partnership. Developments which took place in governmental affairs, espe­ cially World War I agencies and the increasing number of tax cases, made it essential in 1919 to establish a Washington office. Soon thereafter the office was placed in charge of the present manager, J. Marvin Haynes. Toward the end of World War I, Detroit became increasingly important as a commercial and industrial center; consequently, an office was established there in 1920, with Richard Fitz-Gerald as manager, and later as resident partner. In the same year, the expansion of the firm's practice found a further expression in the opening of our first Pacific Coast office in Seattle. Two offices in the State of Ohio were opened in 1923. Prior Sinclair became manager of the Cleveland office and A. Charles Guy manager of the new office in Cincinnati. For many years Klink, Bean & Company had acted as agents for the firm in California. This arrangement eventually led to the merger of its practice with ours in 1924. At that time, George R. Keast was transferred from Pittsburgh as resident partner and assumed active management of the San Francisco and Los Angeles offices. Further expansion of the firm's practice in the East made it desirable to open an office in Baltimore in 1924. Frank E. Hare hiH>-·IU 1'1-. 4 iu_/" c.,.~...-..J~ f{f ..eo. '. :>.. '" '·'4 1Yt,.d<J.I ,....;. J>., I.".... .3 --It /0· " I \ S ff~ ...... JltLk (~fv~ Ii, ' (j,~.~~ h, tH.. IJJtf1>L~"""" I.\. ; »V 'Sf 1>. h{ I&r kN:dd .( ~- ~u-l''':-A/>,! 1 d~ / ~, 1~'-"'4-', ~~ f- J ~~'''r0'''''-J' t IV~Y.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table of Contents
    Table of Contents Preface ..................................................................................................... ix Introductory Notes to Tables ................................................................. xi Chapter A: Selected Economic Statistics ............................................... 1 A1. Resident Population of the United States ............................................................................3 A2. Resident Population by State ..............................................................................................4 A3. Number of Households in the United States .......................................................................6 A4. Total Population by Age Group............................................................................................7 A5. Total Population by Age Group, Percentages .......................................................................8 A6. Civilian Labor Force by Employment Status .......................................................................9 A7. Gross Domestic Product, Net National Product, and National Income ...................................................................................................10 A8. Gross Domestic Product by Component ..........................................................................11 A9. State Gross Domestic Product...........................................................................................12 A10. Selected Economic Measures, Rates of Change...............................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • A Historical Examination of the Constitutionality of the Federal Estate Tax
    William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume 27 (2018-2019) Issue 1 Article 5 October 2018 A Historical Examination of the Constitutionality of the Federal Estate Tax Henry Lowenstein Kathryn Kisska-Schulze Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Taxation-Federal Estate and Gift Commons Repository Citation Henry Lowenstein and Kathryn Kisska-Schulze, A Historical Examination of the Constitutionality of the Federal Estate Tax, 27 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 123 (2018), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol27/iss1/5 Copyright c 2018 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj A HISTORICAL EXAMINATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE FEDERAL ESTATE TAX Henry Lowenstein* and Kathryn Kisska-Schulze** INTRODUCTION During the 2016 presidential campaign debate, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton vowed to raise the Federal Estate Tax to sixty-five percent,1 while Republican candidate Donald Trump pledged to repeal it as part of his overall tax reform proposal.2 Following his election into the executive seat, President Trump signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) on December 22, 2017, which encompasses the most comprehensive tax law changes in the United States in decades.3 Although the law does not completely repeal the Estate Tax, it temporarily doubles the estate and gift tax exclusion amounts for estates of decedents dying and gifts made after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2026.4 Following candidate Trump’s campaign pledge to repeal the Estate Tax,5 and his subsequent signing of the TCJA into law during his first year of presidency,6 an interesting question resonating from these initiatives is whether the Estate Tax is even constitutional.
    [Show full text]
  • Tariff Act of 1930 Corresponding to Sec- 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, by Act June 25, Tion 571, See Section 1651(C) of This Title; Section 572, See 1948, Ch
    §§ 571 to 573 TITLE 19—CUSTOMS DUTIES Page 54 PART 6—GENERAL PROVISIONS at the rate of 6 per centum a year, from the time when said bonds became due. §§ 571 to 573. Repealed. June 17, 1930, ch. 497, title IV, § 651(a)(1), 46 Stat. 762, eff. June 18, (R.S. § 963.) 1930 CODIFICATION Sections, act Sept. 21, 1922, ch. 356, title III, §§ 320, 321, R.S. § 963 derived from act Mar. 2, 1799, ch. 22, § 65, 1 title IV, § 641, 42 Stat. 947, 989, related to provisions as Stat. 676. to effect of repeals, Treaty with Cuba and certain laws Section was formerly classified to section 787 of Title unaffected. 28 prior to the general revision and enactment of Title Provisions of Tariff Act of 1930 corresponding to sec- 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, by act June 25, tion 571, see section 1651(c) of this title; section 572, see 1948, ch. 646, § 1, 62 Stat. 869. section 1316 of this title; section 573, none. § 574. Exemption from taking other oaths CHAPTER 4—TARIFF ACT OF 1930 Nothing contained in title 34 of the Revised SUBTITLE I—HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE OF THE UNITED STATES Statutes shall be construed to exempt the mas- ters or owners of vessels from making and sub- Sec. scribing any oaths required by any laws of the 1202. Harmonized Tariff Schedule. United States not immediately relating to the SUBTITLE II—SPECIAL PROVISIONS collection of the duties on the importation of merchandise into the United States. PART I—MISCELLANEOUS 1301 to 1303. Repealed or Omitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Income Tax Data
    PART 14· INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX DATA PREPARED BY THE STAFFS OF THE TREASURY AND THE JOINT COMMIT'rEE ON INTERNAL REVENUE TAXATION APRIL 1951 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 81736 WASHINGTON: 1951 TABLE 1.- Individual income taxes of the United States, 1913 to 1950 RATES, EXEMPTIONS, AND CREDITS Revenue Act Revenue Act Description Taxes in effect Act of Oct. of 1916 (Sept. I Act of Mar. I Rovonu,of 1917 (Oct. Ad of 1918 (Feb. Revenue Act Revenue Act Revenue Act Dec. 31, 1913 22, 1914 8, 1916) . 3,1917 3,1917) 24,1919) of 1921 of 1924 of1926 ------- Personal exemptions: Married or bead of family $4,000 ___ __ ___ ___ No cbange __ No cbange 1_____ No change __ $2,000 ________ _ No cbange ______ $2,500 2 __________ $2,500 ___________ $3,500. Single ________________________________ _ $3,000_ -- -------- No cbange __ No cbange ______ No cbange __ $1,000 _________ No change _____ _ No cbange ______ No cbange ______ $1,500. $200 ___________ $40L ___________ Credit for dependents __________________ ___ -- -------------- ------------------ -------------- No change ______ No cbange ______ No cbange. Normal tax rate: 2% ______________ 1st $2,000 of net income in excpss of 1% _-_____________ No cbange __ 2% ______________ No cbange __ No cbange ____ 6%3 _____________ 4% 4_____________ lYz%. certain credits. 2d $2,000 of net income in excess of 1% ______________ No cbange __ 2% ______________ No change ___ 4% ____________ 6%3 ________ ___ __ 4%4 _____________ 2% __ ___ _________ lYz%. certain credits. 1% ______________ Next $4,000 of net income in excess of No cbange __ 2% ______________ No change __ 4% ____________ 12% 3___________ _ 8% 4 _______ ~----- 4% ______________ *3%.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Tax Imperialism in Puerto Rico
    American University Law Review Volume 65 Issue 1 Article 1 2015 U.S. Tax Imperialism in Puerto Rico Diane Lourdes Dick Seattle University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr Part of the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Dick, Diane Lourdes (2015) "U.S. Tax Imperialism in Puerto Rico," American University Law Review: Vol. 65 : Iss. 1 , Article 1. Available at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr/vol65/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. U.S. Tax Imperialism in Puerto Rico This article is available in American University Law Review: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr/vol65/ iss1/1 ARTICLES U.S. TAX IMPERIALISM IN PUERTO RICO DIANE LOURDES DICK* This Article uses historical and legal analysis to demonstrate how U.S. domination over Puerto Rico's tax and fiscal policies has been the centerpiece of a colonial system and an especially destructive form of economic imperialism. Specifically, this Article develops a novel theory of U.S. tax imperialism in Puerto Rico, chronicling the sundry ways in which the United States has used tax laws to exert economic dominance over its less developed island colony. During the colonial period, U.S. officials wrote and revised Puerto Rican tax laws to serve U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Heterogeneous Effects of Government Spending: It's All About
    K.7 The Heterogeneous Effects of Government Spending: It’s All About Taxes Ferriere, Axelle and Gaston Navarro Please cite paper as: Ferriere, Axelle and Gaston Navarro (2018). The Heterogeneous Effects of Government Spending: It’s All About Taxes. International Finance Discussion Papers 1237. https://doi.org/10.17016/IFDP.2018.1237 International Finance Discussion Papers Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Number 1237 August 2018 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System International Finance Discussion Papers Number 1237 August 2018 The Heterogeneous Effects of Government Spending: It’s All About Taxes Axelle Ferriere and Gaston Navarro NOTE: International Finance Discussion Papers are preliminary materials circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comment. References to International Finance Discussion Papers (other than an acknowledgment that the writer has had access to unpublished material) should be cleared with the author or authors. Recent IFDPs are available on the Web at www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/ifdp/. This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network electronic library at www.ssrn.com. The Heterogeneous Effects of Government Spending: It's All About Taxes∗ Axelle Ferrierey and Gaston Navarroz May 2018 Abstract This paper investigates how government spending multipliers depend on the distribution of taxes across households. We exploit historical variations in the financing of spending in the U.S. since 1913 to show that multipliers are positive only when financed with more progressive taxes, and zero otherwise. We rationalize this finding within a heterogeneous-household model with indivisible labor supply. The model results in a lower labor responsiveness to tax changes for higher-income earners.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Combat Zone Tax Exclusion
    Chapter 7 History of the Combat Zone Tax Exclusion BRANDON R. GOULD STANLEY A. HOROWITZ Executive Summary Exclusion of military pay from federal income taxes has been a longstanding element of U.S. policy on war finance, combat compensation, and revenue collection in combat zones. The Combat Zone Tax Exclusion (CZTE) was originally established to alleviate the burden of war finance from those who fought in the nation’s conflicts. During World War (WW)II, combat tax benefits were separated from war finance policy and became a permanent component of combat compensation. Over time, administrative policies and changes to the tax code have eroded the tax exclusion’s traditional purpose, while generating an unintended distribution of benefits. At present, the CZTE neither serves its original purpose nor its later historical role of selectively rewarding those who face a high level of combat risk. The CZTE was originally created to exempt servicemembers from income tax increases required to finance WWI and WWII. The first income tax exclusion, established in the Revenue Act of 1918, fully offset across-the-board cuts in the personal income tax deduction with a $3,500 tax exclusion for active military personnel. The policy was reprised in the Revenue Act of 1942 through a $250 ($300 for married members) exemption that precisely offset a contemporaneous cut in the personal deduction. Unlike its WWI predecessor, the 1942 exclusion was not available to commissioned officers. Legislative history indicates that the Congress’s purpose for both exclusions was clear: those who fought the nation’s wars should not bear the “double burden” of financing the conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York State of New York, State of Connecticut, State of Maryla
    Case 1:18-cv-06427 Document 1 Filed 07/17/18 Page 1 of 52 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK STATE OF NEW YORK, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, Civil Action No. 18-cv-6427 STATE OF MARYLAND, and STATE OF NEW JERSEY, COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY Plaintiffs, AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF v. JURY REQUESTED STEVEN T. MNUCHIN, in his official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Treasury; the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY; DAVID J. KAUTTER, in his official capacity as Acting Commissioner of the United States Internal Revenue Service; the UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE; and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants. INTRODUCTION 1. The States of New York, Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey (the “Plaintiff States”) bring this action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to invalidate the new $10,000 cap on the federal tax deduction for state and local taxes (“SALT”). Congress has included a deduction for all or a significant portion of state and local taxes in every tax statute since the enactment of the first federal income tax in 1861. The new cap effectively eviscerates the SALT deduction, overturning more than 150 years of precedent by drastically curtailing the deduction’s 1 Case 1:18-cv-06427 Document 1 Filed 07/17/18 Page 2 of 52 scope. As the drafters of the Sixteenth Amendment1 and every subsequent Congress have understood, the SALT deduction is essential to prevent the federal tax power from interfering with the States’ sovereign authority to make their own choices about whether and how much to invest in their own residents, businesses, infrastructure, and more—authority that is guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment and foundational principles of federalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Listing of Selected Federal Tax Legislation Reprinted in the Irs Cumulative Bulletin, 1913-1990
    [JOINT COMMITTEE PRINT] LISTING OF SELECTED FEDERAL TAX LEGISLATION REPRINTED IN THE IRS CUMULATIVE BULLETIN, 1913-1990 Prepared by the Staff OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION DECEMBER, 19, 1991 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 45-166 WASHINGTON : 1991 For sale by ihe U.S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents. Mail Stop; SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328 ISBN 0-16-037118-X JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 102d Congress, 1st Session HOUSE SENATE DAN ROSTENKOWSKI, Illinois LLOYD BENTSEN, Texas Chairman Vice Chairman SAM GroBONS, Florida DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, New York J.J. PICKLE, Texas MAX BAUCUS, Montana BILL ARCHER, Texas BOB PACKWOOD, Oregon GUY VANDER, JAGT, Michigan ROBERT DOLE, Kansas Harry L. Gutman, Chief of Staff (II) INTRODUCTION This pamphlet,^ prepared by the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, provides a listing of selected Federal tax legislation re- printed in the Internal Revenue Service Cumulative Bulletin (C.B.), ^ 1913-1990. This pamphlet is an update of a prior staff publication. The listing covers significant Federal tax legislation from the Revenue Act of 1913 through the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990). The list includes the Act, the bill number, committee/conference reports. Public Law number, and C.B. citation. Listing Selected > This pamphlet may be cited as follows: Joint Ck)mmittee on Taxation, of De- Federal Tax Legislation Reprinted in the IRS Cumulative Bulletin, 1913-1990, (JCS-19-91), cember 19, 1991. _ . _, ^ . , lax Legis- 2 See also prior pamphlet: Joint Committee on Taxation, Listing of Selected Federal 1989. lation Reprinted in the IRS Cumulative Bulletin, 1913-1987 (JCS-5-89), March 2, (1) SELECTED FEDERAL TAX LEGISLATION REPRINTED IN THE IRS CUMULATIVE BULLETIN (C.B.) Act and Reports Cumulative Bulletin Revenue Act of 1913 (H.K 3321) P.L.
    [Show full text]
  • FINANCIAL HISTORY of the UNITED STATES a FINANCIAL HISTORY of the UNITED STATES
    A FINANCIAL HISTORY of the UNITED STATES A FINANCIAL HISTORY of the UNITED STATES Volume II From J.P. Morgan to the Institutional Investor (1900 -1970) Jerry W. Markham M.E.Sharpe Armonk, New York London, England Copyright © 2002 by M. E. Sharpe, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the publisher, M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 80 Business Park Drive, Armonk, New York 10504. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Markham, Jerry W. A financial history of the United States / Jerry W. Markham. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. Contents: v. 1. From Christopher Columbus to the Robber Barons (1492–1900) — v. 2. From J.P. Morgan to the institutional investor (1900–1970) — v. 3. From the age of derivatives into the new millennium (1970–2001) ISBN 0-7656-0730-1 (alk. paper) 1. Finance—United States—History. I. Title. HG181.M297 2001 332’.0973—dc21 00-054917 Printed in the United States of America The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z 39.48-1984. ~ BM (c)10987654321 For my parents, John and Marie Markham In every generation concern has arisen, sometimes to the boiling point. Fear has emerged that the United States might one day discover that a relatively small group of individuals, especially through banking institutions they headed, might become virtual masters of the economic destiny of the United States. —Adolf A. Berle, February 1969 Contents List of Illustrations xiii Preface xv Acknowledgments xvii Introduction xix Chapter 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 112(B)(7) Liquidations
    Volume 55 Issue 3 Dickinson Law Review - Volume 55, 1950-1951 3-1-1951 Section 112(b)(7) Liquidations Herman H. Krekstein Follow this and additional works at: https://ideas.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/dlra Recommended Citation Herman H. Krekstein, Section 112(b)(7) Liquidations, 55 DICK. L. REV. 189 (1951). Available at: https://ideas.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/dlra/vol55/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Dickinson Law IDEAS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dickinson Law Review by an authorized editor of Dickinson Law IDEAS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DICKINSON LAW REVIEW SECTION 112(b) (7) LIQUIDATIONS By HERMAN H. KREKSTEIN* The choice of form of organization for the conduct of business engages the attention of the owners principally when the enterprise is initiated. As con- ditions and circumstano.-s change, the factors which dictated the choice may be re- examined. Aside from any consideration of the effect of income taxes, the cor- porate form offers a combination of advantages not available to other forms of business organization. Continuity of existence, limited liability, transferability of interest, convenience of financing and flexibility of control are desirable character- istics of the corporation. Some of these, but not all, are inherent in either the individual proprietorship, the partnership, the syndicate, the trust or other forms of joint ownership. From the viewpoint of income taxes, a variety of drcumstances will determine whether the corporate form of operation is more costly than other available forms of organization. Ordinarily the earnings of corporations are doubly subjected to the Federal income tax before they can be made available to the shareholders.
    [Show full text]
  • A Chronology of Postwar U.S. Federal Income Tax Policy
    CAEPR Working Paper #2007-021 A Chronology Of Postwar U.S. Federal Income Tax Policy Shu-Chun Susan Yang Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica October 10, 2007 This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network electronic library at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1020679. The Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research resides in the Department of Economics at Indiana University Bloomington. CAEPR can be found on the Internet at: http://www.indiana.edu/~caepr. CAEPR can be reached via email at [email protected] or via phone at 812-855-4050. ©2007 by Shu-Chun Susan Yang. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. A CHRONOLOGY OF POSTWAR U.S. FEDERAL INCOME TAX POLICY SHU-CHUN SUSAN YANG Abstract. This note provides a chronology of major tax events that involved changes in federal taxes on individual and corporate income from 1948 to 2006. For each event, the note provides background and policy motivation, major provisions, legislative timeline, and estimated revenue changes. As most tax changes were preceded by extensive legislative delays, this chronology suggests that people were likely to have foreknowledge about tax policy. It also ¯nds that postwar income tax policy was typically motivated by one of three rationales: 1) balancing the budget or reducing de¯cits, 2) controlling inflation, and 3) stimulating economic activity or promoting growth. 1. Introduction This note documents the legislative history of major changes in federal income on individuals and corporations from 1948 to 2006.
    [Show full text]