That when the owner occupied the property, he was entitled to deduct the taxes paid thereon as if the same were rented. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 155.

That State and municipal taxes paid upon a homestead, and ordinary repairs thereon, were deductible. 11 Int. Rev. Rec. 89.

That national, State, county, and municipal taxes actually paid were deductible from the income of the year in which payment was made, even though paid on property from which no income was derived. 11 Int. Rev. Rec. 98. But that such taxes not actually paid until after the end of the income year should not be deducted from that year's income, even though they might have been then due. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 60. As to legacy and succession taxes, see 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59.

That assessments by municipal corporations for the laying out, etc. of streets, sewers, etc., might be deducted from income where they were laid upon all taxpayers within the corporation. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 196.

That assessments upon the property holders of a certain locality by the municipal authorities on account of special improvements in streets adjoining their premises, should be deducted from the income of persons so assessed. 5 Int. Rev. Rec. 115; 3 Id. 188, 204.

That where by State laws stocks divided into shares were not taxable by cities and towns, but were taxed to the companies, and the tax collected.

by the State was credited to the towns where the stockholders resided, the stockholder could not deduct the tax from his income, since the deduction was made by the corporation before the dividend. was declared. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 181. But see 10

Int. Rev. Rec. 9.

That the amount withheld by corporations from the dividends of the shareholder, as provided by the internal revenue laws, should be deducted, since the tax was in reality a tax upon the shareholder, and its payment by the corporation was merely a mode of collecting it. 10 Int. Rev. Rec. 9.

That losses in one kind of business might be deducted from the gains in another, or from the gross income of the year, and that assessors should not allow the deduction of amounts claimed to have been lost in business when in reality they should be regarded as investments or expenditures. 3 Int. Rev. Rev. Rec. 140; 7 Id. 59.

That no so called loss incurred by a gift of property could be allowed as a deduction. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59.

That the fact that income was devoted to payment of debts did not release the same from liability to income tax. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59.

That the original cost of property destroyed by fire during the year, less insurance received, might be deducted from the income for that year of the

person to whom the loss occurred. 5 Int. Rev. Rec. 154.

That a person was not allowed to improve the property, but was allowed to devote the income to restoration. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 180.

That the loss of a stock company by fire or shipwreck, if liable to tax, would be deductible from its income, not from that of its stockholders; and the fact that such company was not subject to income tax made a ioss of this kind none the less a loss of the company, and it could not be deducted from the income of the stockholder. 5 Int. Rev. Rec. 148.

That estimated appreciations or depreciations of the value of property were not to be considered in ascertaining amounts to be taxed. 5 Int. Rev. Rec. 154.

That payment by a surety made the principal his debtor. Whether the debt was worthless or not was a question to be determined in each particular case. Money paid as surety would not necessarily be lost, but when found to be a loss it might be deducted under the head of "debts ascertained to be worthless." 9 Int. Rev. Rec. 121.

That the whole amount expended for fertilizers applied during the income year to a farmer's lands might be deducted, but no deduction was to to be allowed for fertilizers produced on the farm, and the cost of seed for sowing, etc. might be deducted. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 58.

That no deduction could be allowed for the sub

sistence of laborers employed on a farm so far as they lived on its produce. 3 Int. Rev. Rec. 140.

That there can be no deduction for depreciation in stocks or other property until disposed of and a loss realized. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59. But where stocks were sold for less than actual cost the difference between such cost and the price was allowed as a deduction from income of the year of sale. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59.

That losses during the income year on sales of real estate purchased during the income year, or within two years previous, might be deducted from the income for such income year. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 60.

That debts previously considered good, but found to be worthless during the income year, might be deducted from the creditor's income for that year, if never before deducted. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 60.

That losses of capital such as by robbery, or as surety, etc., could not be deducted. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 60. And losses in business since the end of the income year could not enter into the income assessments for that year. Bout. 275. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 181; 2 Id. 68

That no deduction could be made for money paid on a judgment against a taxpayer in an action of tort. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 155.

That the amount paid for a substitute by one drafted during the Civil War could not be deducted, (2 Int. Rev. Rec. 92,) and that an officer could not

deduct the expense of servant hire or fuel, unless the latter was consumed in business, but that he might deduct house rent. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 100.

That a mere speculative loss, there being no sale, could not be deducted. 3 Int. Rev. Rec. 109. So of estimated depreciations, as of vessels. 1 Int. Rev. Rec. 109, 197.

That where a farmer lost animals by death, he might deduct the purchase money; but if the animals were raised by him, there could be no deduction. 3 Int. Rev. Rec. 100.

That where a person could not be compelled to pay interest nominally falling due in the year, it could not be deducted, except that where interest was paid on an income paying business, only such portion as was not in excess of the interest due to the taxpayer was to be offset against income. 7 Int. Rev. Rec. 59.

That where a company had collapsed and the stock was worthless, the loss on such stock should be deducted from the income of the year in which the company ceased to exist. 11 Int. Rev. Rec. 105. To the effect that there must be a discretion given in making returns, and that it is not necessary to make a debt deductible that it should be declared worthless at law or in equity, see

United States v. Frost, 9 Int. Rev. Rec. 41.

Rent, Labor, Repairs, etc. It was held,

That money paid for labor, except such as was