Lanman & Kemp-Barclay & Co. of Colombia v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 26 TC 582 (1956) -- summary under Non-Business-Income Tax

The Republic of Colombia levied, pursuant to the same tax statute under which an income tax and an excess profits tax was levied, a capital tax (referred to as a "patrimony tax") which was "based on the theory that the income tax, in order to be an equitable revenue system, requires a tax on capital to more fairly distribute the burdens amongst the nation's taxpayers and to prevent the state from being penalied if a property owner, through negligence or for some other reason, fails to realize the inherent productive potential of his property" (p. 587). The Colombian tax law deemed the income tax, the excess profits tax and the patrimony tax to be "one and indivisible". The patrimony tax was not creditable as an income tax or a tax in lieu of an income tax for purposes of s. 131 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 because, separately considered, it was really a tax on property and resulted in a levy upon the net value of the taxpayer's assets which would include any unrealized appreciation of such value, it was computed separately from the income tax, and a taxpayer could be liable for patrimony tax in a year in which the taxpayer had no revenue and was not liable for income tax. There was no substantial equivalent of the patrimony tax under the American income tax system.