- 23 -
Petitioner contends that the fact that the parties agreed to
submit this case under Rule 122 shows that no facts are in
dispute and only questions of law remain. We disagree. It is
true that the facts are fully stipulated. It is also true that
the stipulated facts show that the Estate of James Letts, Jr., by
claiming the marital deduction for the value of the Item II trust
property and not electing QTIP treatment for it represented in
effect that the property was not terminable interest property,
while decedent's estate represented that it was. Thus, the
stipulated facts show that the two estates made inconsistent
factual representations.
6. Conclusion
We conclude that the duty of consistency precludes
petitioner from excluding the value of the Item II trust property
from the gross estate.
To reflect the foregoing and concessions,
Decision will be
entered under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Last modified: May 25, 2011