Estate of Mary D. Maggos, Deceased, Catherine M. Adkins, Special Administrator - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         

          v. United States, 682 F.2d 1220, 1224 (5th Cir. 1982), as does a            
          transfer that is made without an independent appraisal of the               
          underlying property, Bergeron v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.                   
          1986-587.  A gift also may arise from a transfer without an                 
          arm's-length negotiation over the purchase price, see Righter v.            
          United States, 258 F. Supp. 763, 767-768 (W.D. Mo. 1966), revd.             
          and remanded on another issue 400 F.2d 344 (8th Cir. 1968), when            
          the effect of a transfer is to remove the donor from a business             
          that he or she created, Galluzzo v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.                
          1981-733, or when the moving impulse for a transfer is the desire           
          to pass assets on to a family member, Robinette v. Helvering,               
          318 U.S. 184, 187-188 (1943).  Transfers between family members             
          are subject to strict scrutiny, and the presumption is that such            
          transfers are gifts.  Harwood v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 239                  
          (1984), affd. without published opinion 786 F.2d 1174 (9th Cir.             
          1986); Estate of Reynolds v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 172, 201                 
          (1970); Mercil v. Commissioner, 24 T.C. 1150, 1153 (1955); see              
          Muserlian v. Commissioner, 932 F.2d 109, 112 (2d Cir. 1991),                
          affg. T.C. Memo. 1989-493.                                                  
               Our review of the record in the light most favorable to the            
          nonmoving party (i.e., respondent) convinces us that genuine                
          issues as to material fact remain to be decided by the Court.               
          Petitioner claims that the record shows clearly that Ms. Maggos             
          was defrauded because she transferred her PCAB shares for less              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011