The United States Trust Co. v. Helvering case in 1938 revolved around the taxation of a trust's income. The U.S Trust Company, as executor of an estate, had established a trust for the decedent’s grandchildren and argued that it should not be taxed on the income generated by this trust because it was not distributed but accumulated for future distribution to beneficiaries who were minors at that time. However, Commissioner Guy Tresillian Helvering contended that under Section 166 of Revenue Act (1928), even if undistributed, such income is taxable to trusts when there are no provisions in the instrument creating them which would cause these amounts to be currently taxed to others regardless of distribution. The Supreme Court sided with Commissioner Helvering ruling that indeed such accumulations are subject to tax under Section 166 since they fall within its definition of "income" whether distributed or not during any taxable year.

In the dissenting opinion for United States Trust Co., Executor, v. Helvering, Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1938), Justice McReynolds argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles and precedent regarding taxation law. He contended that it was incorrect to tax income derived from property held in trust as if it were personal income of the beneficiary when such income is not actually received by them. According to him, this interpretation contradicts previous rulings which stated that an individual cannot be taxed on wealth they do not possess or control. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential double taxation issues arising from taxing both trustees and beneficiaries on the same source of revenue. In his view, only those who have actual possession or enjoyment of income should bear its tax burden.