-59-
Petitioner failed to present an allocation of the claimed
deduction between the expense of maintaining personalty
bequeathed to decedent's children, and the expense of maintaining
the condominium. Moreover, as the property is occupied by Mrs.
Nathan and the out-of-town guests, the evidence does not support
a finding that the portion of the expense allocable to the
maintenance of the condominium, if any, does not inure to the
benefit of the heirs, legatees, or devisees. We find, therefore,
that petitioner has failed to meet its burden of proving that any
portion of the claimed deduction for the expense of a maid is for
maintaining or preserving the condominium prior to its
distribution.23
Issue 6. Whether Petitioner is Subject to an Accuracy-Related
Penalty under Section 6662
We have found that petitioner erroneously reduced the value
of the gross estate for: inter vivos gifts of $120,000 that were
not completed prior to the death of decedent, nor deductible as
claims against the estate; debts totaling $100,000 for which
there was no evidence of indebtedness; and $20,501 as an expense
for the maintenance of property prior to distribution that the
23 Respondent introduced a letter into evidence that Jack
sent to the IRS in which he stated the $100 weekly payments were
retirement payments to "Mother's housekeeper who had been with
the family for over 15 years." We have found that the claimed
expense fails to meet the requirements of sec. 20.2053-3, Estate
Tax Regs. In so finding, we do not address the question of
whether the claimed deduction was actually for the expense of
employing the maid, or for paying her retirement income.
Page: Previous 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011