October Term 2007 · Docket 06-1509

Does a shareholder receive a tax-free return of capital when taking money from a corporation without stock ownership?

The dispute centers on whether a shareholder can claim a tax-free return of capital for funds taken from a corporation while acting in a non-shareholder capacity.

Official caption
Boulware v. United States
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Cline argued the tax code excludes non-shareholder payments from capital return rules.

    Ms. Maynard argued the taxpayer must prove specific factual elements for the defense.

    justice_souter_asked_about_the_significance_of_the_phrase_with_respect_to_the_stock.

    justice_kennedy_asked_if_the_corporation_balance_sheet_exists_in_the_record.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case examines the tax treatment of corporate distributions. The core issue is whether a shareholder can claim a tax-free return of capital for funds taken from a corporation while acting in a non-shareholder capacity.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 8, 2008.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The taxpayer wants the court to accept the return of capital defense.

The government wants the court to reject the return of capital defense.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The taxpayer argues the tax code excludes non-shareholder payments from capital return rules.

The government argues the taxpayer must prove specific factual elements for the defense.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Souter asked about the significance of the phrase with respect to the stock.

Justice Kennedy asked if the corporation’s balance sheet exists in the record.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the boundary between shareholder and non-shareholder financial actions. It determines how taxpayers calculate their tax liability on corporate distributions. It clarifies the legal standard for claiming a return of capital.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON