- 27 -
of the 1951 Agreement between Cyril and Joseph) and then credited
against the date-of-death value (or, as in this case, the value
as of the alternate valuation date) of the property subject to
section 2036(a). The net amount is to be included in the gross
estate. United States v. Righter, 400 F.2d 344, 348 (8th Cir.
1968); United States v. Past, 347 F.2d at 14; Estate of Vardell
v. Commissioner, 307 F.2d 688, 693 (5th Cir. 1962), revg. 35 T.C.
50 (1960); Estate of Davis v. Commissioner, 51 T.C. 269, 280-281
(1968), revd. and remanded 440 F.2d 896 (3d Cir. 1971); Estate of
Gregory v. Commissioner, 39 T.C. at 1021.
Petitioner argues that in valuing the consideration received
by Cyril, this Court should apply a proportional rule and reduce
the includable value of the trusts by the proportion of the value
of the corpus at death that is attributable to the consideration
received by Cyril under the 1951 Agreement. However, it is well
settled that the consideration received is to be valued at the
time of the transfer (i.e., at the time of the 1951 Agreement)
and then credited against the date-of-death value of the property
subject to section 2036(a). United States v. Righter, supra at
348; United States v. Past, supra at 14; Estate of Vardell v.
Commissioner, supra at 693; Estate of Davis v. Commissioner,
supra at 280-281; Estate of Gregory v. Commissioner, supra at
1021.
The parties do not dispute that Cyril received a life income
interest in 50 percent of Joseph's JM and Specialty stock, as
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011