-13-
Sec. 25.2511-2(c), Gift Tax Regs. Thus, for the purposes of the
gift tax, a "gift is not consummate until put beyond recall."
Burnett v. Guggenheim, 288 U.S. 280, 286 (1933).
Previously, under facts similar to those now before us, this
Court has held that because the taxpayer had, in the years then
before us, the right to reform the deeds of gift and revest title
in herself, no completed gift was made during those taxable years
for the portion of the property transferred in error. Touche v.
Commissioner, supra at 569; Bergeron v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1986-587; Dodge v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1968-238 (finding a
right to reform gifts to convent in amounts larger than intended
by donor or expected by recipients); see also Dodge v. United
States, 413 F.2d at 1242 (adopting the analysis of the Tax Court
in Dodge v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1968-238).7 As to the
portion of the property that was transferred according to the
intent of the donor, however, this Court found that the transfer
was a completed gift. Touche v. Commissioner, supra; Bergeron v.
7 In Dodge v. United States, 292 F.Supp. 573, 576 (S.D.
Fla. 1968), affd. 413 F.2d 1239 (5th Cir. 1969), the District
Court held that a deed executed by the taxpayer purporting on its
face to transfer a greater number of acres than what the donor
intended, was and could be properly reformed under the laws of
the State of Minnesota (the State in which the property was
located) on the basis of mutual mistake of the donors and the
donee. On appeal the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
confined itself to legal issues centering on the existence of a
unilateral error. The court, expressing its belief that the
State of Minnesota would not depart from the prevailing rule
allowing reformation, affirmed. Dodge v. United States, 413 F.2d
at 1243.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011