- 25 -
decedent’s domicile at the time of death (the Court of Appeals
for the Eighth Circuit).
The dissent expresses the belief that the estate’s
representative should be considered the petitioner. As a matter
of habit and practice, however, this Court most often refers to
and treats a decedent’s estate as the petitioner in an estate tax
case. See, e.g., Estate of Bond v. Commissioner, 104 T.C. 652
(1995); Estate of Robertson v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 678, 679
(1992), revd. on another issue 15 F.3d 779 (8th Cir. 1994);
Belcher v. Commissioner, 83 T.C. 227, 228 (1984); Estate of
McElroy v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 509, 510 (1984). Consequently,
the fiduciary is commonly referred to as the person by or through
whom an estate acts. See Rule 24(b). Any claim that may be
pursued is not personal to a fiduciary and is intrinsically part
of the rights and assets that compose the estate, which exists
for the benefit of its beneficiaries and creditors.
In addition, by choosing an estate’s representative as the
petitioner, the dissent would open the way for a profound and
deleterious side effect--forum shopping.3 If the estate is
treated as the petitioner, forum shopping is minimized because a
decedent’s domicile is fixed at death. It is also significant
that the law of the decedent’s domicile governs an estate’s
3 The forum-shopping problem would be further exacerbated where
an estate is represented by more than one fiduciary whose
residences would offer the possibility of an appeal to different
Courts of Appeals.
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011