- 8 -
liability. Sec. 2518(a); sec. 25.2518-1(b), Gift Tax Regs.; see
also secs. 2046, 2654(c). The parties concede that a qualified
disclaimer was made.
The parties' disagreement lies in the calculation of the
marital deduction as affected by the disclaimer. Resolution of
this dispute will require interpretation of the marital bequest
in the will. It is a cardinal rule of construction of wills that
the intent of the testator controls. Estate of Swenson v.
Commissioner, 65 T.C. 243, 250 (1975). Accordingly, we look to
the precise wording employed by the decedent in his will. Id.
The most important matter to resolve is not what the decedent
meant to say, but what is meant by what the decedent did say.
Connecticut Junior Republic v. Sharon Hosp., 188 Conn. 1, 20, 448
A.2d 190, 194 (1982). The words in decedent’s will must be
interpreted in light of their context with reference to the will
in its entirety. Estate of Swenson v. Commissioner, supra; see
also Estate of Bruning v. Commissioner, 888 F.2d 657, 659 (10th
Cir. 1989), affg. T.C. Memo. 1988-5.
The marital deduction clause in decedent’s will is one that
is commonly used in estate plans; it is a formula designed to
take advantage of the credit equivalent. The intent of the
clause is to reduce or eliminate Federal estate taxes on the
estates of both spouses.6 See generally Mulligan, “Drafting
6 This is accomplished by using the unified credit available
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011