- 16 -
consequently, that the Tax Court is not bound under the Golsen
rule.
The Golsen rule requires a conflict between this Court and
the court having venue over an appeal of the case sub judice.
Because we decide in the instant case to accede to the decisions
of the Courts of Appeals that have reversed our decisions on the
issue before us, no such conflict exists, and therefore it is
unnecessary to address the parties’ arguments concerning the
proper venue for an appeal of the instant case.
We also find it unnecessary, at this point, to winnow out
the differences in our analyses in our prior cases and those of
the Courts of Appeals that have reversed us. Finally, we see no
reason in the instant case to adopt either the rationale of the
Fifth and Eighth Circuits, on the one hand, or of the Sixth
Circuit, on the other, as in either case the result is the same:
the marital deduction is allowed. Suffice it to say that, in
light of the reversals of this Court’s decisions by three
different circuits, we now decide that we will accede to the
result in those appellate decisions and will no longer disallow
the marital deduction for interests that are contingent upon the
executor’s election under section 2056(b)(7)(B)(v), where the
election is actually made under facts similar to those in the
instant case. Accordingly, we hold that the marital trust
property in the instant case qualifies as QTIP under section
2056(b)(7).
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011