Court Opinion

ID: 9637661
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:14:18.884724+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:58.837419
License: Public Domain

WILBUR, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
In addition to what is said by Judge CAVAN AH, I wish to add the following statement: As I understand the record, the petitioner claimed, and was granted, the right to take from the income of the year 1923 all payments actually made in that year by reason of return of premium on policies written in previous years, and, in addition to the allowance upon premiums actually returned during the year 1923, the petitioner set up a reserve of 22.38 per cent, of all premiums collected during the year to take care of such return "of commission as it was estimated would he required in future years according to the experience of the agency, or, to state the matter differently, the agent returns as income only 77.62 per cent, of the overriding commissions received by him as gross income and deducts therefrom the actual returns of premium made during the year. The total fire overriding commission for 1923 was $236,-693.31, and 22.38 per cent, thereof was $52,-971.96. If this is true, it is clear that the petitioner is not entitled to both deductions during the year 1923. If the percentage of 22,38 is reasonable, it will malee no difference in the long fun to the petitioner whether the return commissions due to canceled policies are deducted from the revenue of the current year or from a contingent fund set up, as petitioner claims the right to do.