Court Opinion

ID: 9637683
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:15:26.034944+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:08.035059
License: Public Domain

MORTON, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
I take it that the statute is only intended to apply to property of nonresident decedents which is situated in this country. Stock in domestic corporations is explicitly covered by the statute. I concur in regarding it as taxable.
As to the foreign bonds and shares, it does not seem to me that they are property situated in this country, within the meaning of the statute. The legal conception of the situs of property of this character has changed from time to time, as is clearly shown in the opinion of the Board of Tax Appeals in Brooks et al. v. Commissioner, 22 B. T. A. 71. It does not seem to mo that it was the intention of the statute to enact into statutory law the views as to situs of personal property which were at that time held by the United States Supreme Court, and have since changed. I think the statute is intended to reach property which has a situs here under the law as it stands when the occasion to tax arises. I agree with the majority opinion in Brooks v. Commissioner, supra.