Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Nestle Purina Petcare Co. v. Comm'r. of Int'l. Rev., No. 09-1381

By FindLaw Staff on February 09, 2010 1:11 PM

In the taxpayer's appeal from a tax court's ruling that the taxpayer could not deduct payments for cash distribution redemptive dividends, the order is affirmed where, because 26 U.S.C. section 404(k) did not provide for a deduction-for-dividends-paid under 26 U.S.C. section 561, the taxpayer did not have a "deduction for dividends paid (within the meaning of section 561)" needed to satisfy the exception in 26 U.S.C. section 162(k)(A)(iii).

Read Nestle Purina Petcare Co. v. Comm'r. of Int'l. Rev., No. 09-1381

Appellate Information

Submitted: December 15, 2009

Filed: February 9, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Judge Benton

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard