- 48 -
deduction. Id. at 963-964. Notwithstanding the decedent's
expressed intent that the trust qualify for the marital
deduction, the "accumulation proviso" seemed to mean that
the surviving spouse was not entitled to all of the income
from the trust and, therefore, the surviving spouse did not
have a "qualifying income interest for life" as defined by
section 2056(b)(7)(B)(ii). Thus, there was a conflict
between the provisions of the trust agreement under which
the surviving spouse was to receive the "entire net income"
of the trust and the accumulation proviso under which the
trustee was authorized to accumulate income deemed to be in
excess of the amount necessary for the surviving spouse's
"best interests".
In the Ellingson case, the Court of Appeals resolved
the ambiguity in the trust agreement by interpreting the
language used in the accumulation proviso in accordance
with the "the settlor's clearly manifested intent" that the
marital deduction property qualify for the QTIP deduction.
Id. at 965. The Court of Appeals concluded that because
the trustees had chosen to make the QTIP election, the
"best interests" of the surviving spouse, as that phrase
was used in the accumulation proviso, required the trustees
to pay all of the income of the trust to the surviving
Page: Previous 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011