- 14 -
representation is true, even if it is not, and the taxpayer may
not assert the contrary. Herrington v. Commissioner, supra.
The three elements of the duty of consistency refer to
conflicting representations that are made by a taxpayer.
However, as discussed next, the duty of consistency can also be
applied to bind one person to a representation made by another
where the two are deemed to be in privity. We will first decide
whether the duty of consistency applies between the Estates of
James Letts, Jr., and of decedent; we will then decide whether
the three elements of the duty of consistency are present in this
case.
3. Whether the Estates of Decedent and Her Husband Are
Subject to the Duty of Consistency
Petitioner contends that the duty of consistency does not
apply between decedent's estate and the Estate of James Letts,
Jr. We disagree.
The duty of consistency can bind a beneficiary of an estate
to a representation made on an estate tax return if the
beneficiary was a fiduciary of the estate. Beltzer v. United
States, supra; Cluck v. Commissioner; supra at 333; LeFever v.
Commissioner, supra at 543; Griffith v. United States, 27 AFTR 2d
71-436, 71-1 USTC par. 9280 (N.D. Tex. 1971); McMillan v. United
States, 14 AFTR 2d 5704, 64-2 USTC par. 9720 (S.D. W. Va. 1964);
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011