- 26 -
Rev. Rul. 64-101, 1964-1 C.B. (Part 1) at 78, also cited
similarities in “purpose and effect” between statutory dower and
temporary family support allowances payable from corpus, which
were excluded from the subchapter J estate under section
1.661(a)-2(e), Income Tax Regs., at the time Rev. Rul. 64-101,
1964-1 C.B. (Part 1) 77, was published. However, Estate of McCoy
v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 562 (1968), held invalid that portion of
section 1.661(a)-2(e), Income Tax Regs., and the regulation was
accordingly modified.17 Nevertheless, in modifying the portion
of the regulation dealing with family support allowances, the
Commissioner did not retract support for the exclusion of
statutory dower from the subchapter J estate on the ground of its
legal similarity to real property whose title directly vests in a
16(...continued)
obviously does not rely upon that reading inasmuch as it relies
upon the similarity of statutory dower to real property, passage
of title to which is subject to debts secured by mortgages and
other liens.
17 Under sec. 1.661(a)-2(e), Income Tax Regs., as it
currently reads, temporary family and surviving spouse support
allowances, whether payable from income or corpus under local
law, are included in a beneficiary's gross income as second tier
distributions. Secs. 1.662(a)-2(e), 1.662(a)-3(b), Income Tax
Regs. But see Ferguson et al., supra sec. 6.10 at 6:19, which
distinguishes between statutory nonvested family support
allowances, which may be awarded at the discretion of the
presiding court, Estate of Cunha v. Commissioner, 279 F.2d 292,
297 (9th Cir. 1960), affg. 30 T.C. 812 (1958), and are included
in subchapter J distributions, and vested family support
allowances, which are excluded.
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