Case: Frank G. Drenning, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internad Revenue, Respondent
Abbreviation: Drenning v. Commissioner
Decision Date: 1928-01-26
Docket Number: Docket No. 5834
Citation: 10 B.T.A. 231
Volume: 10
Reporter: Reports of the United States Board of Tax Appeals
Court: United States Board of Tax Appeals
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Frank G. Drenning, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internad Revenue, Respondent.
Judges: 
Pages: 231–232

Head Matter:
Frank G. Drenning, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internad Revenue, Respondent.
Docket No. 5834.
Promulgated January 26, 1928.
Frank G. Drenning, Esq., pro se.
0. Bennett, Esq., for the respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION.
Lansdon:
The only question to be determined in this proceeding is whether an attorney fee for professional services rendered under contract with a municipal board of education constitutes exempt income.
The petitioner concedes that he was neither an officer nor an employee of any State or political subdivision thereof within the meaning of section 1211 of the Revenue Act of 1926, but contends that the services rendered by him under contract constituted the performance of a governmental function of a political subdivision of a State and that the income derived therefrom may not be taxed by the Federal Government.
We are unable to agree with the petitioner's contention and approve the determination of the respondent upon the authority of S. P. Freeling, 7 B. T. A. 1238, and Robert G. Gordon, 5 B. T. A. 1047. See also A. C. Kreipke, 7 B. T. A. 777; Fred H. Tibbetts, 6 B. T. A. 827; Union Paving Co., 6 B. T. A. 527; Emma B. Brunner, Executrix, 5 B. T. A. 1135.
Judgment will be entered for the respondent.