Bogardus v. Commissioner, 302 U.S. 34 (1937), was a United States Supreme Court case discussing, under United States tax law, how to distinguish compensation from tax-exempt gifts under § 102(a).

[1] It is notable (and thus appears frequently in law school casebooks) for the following holdings: Is a sum of money paid to former stockholders and employees compensation which is subject to Federal Income Tax or a gift that is exempt from taxes?

The term "gift" in §102(a) is largely to be defined by reference to the motives of the payor.

If the payment, though voluntary, is "in return for services rendered," or proceeds from "the constraining force of any moral or legal duty," or anticipates a "benefit" to the payor, then it is taxable to the payee even if characterized as a "gift" by the payor.

On the other hand, if the payment proceeds from a "detached and disinterested generosity," if it is made "out of affection, respect ... or like impulses," then it is an excludable gift even though the relationship between payor and payee has previously been in a business context.