Estate of Algerine Allen Smith, Deceased, James Allen Smith, Executor - Page 26

                                       - 26 -                                         
          makes the restoration after his death.16  Similarly, in the                 
          instant case, the relevant estate tax consequences should not               
          vary where the estate, rather than decedent, makes the payment              
          upon which section 1341(a) relief is predicated.17  The right to            
          section 1341(a) relief clearly would have been includable in the            
          gross estate had Exxon's claim been settled and paid prior to               
          decedent's death.  We see no reason why decedent's "contingent"             
          right to section 1341(a) relief should not be included in her               
          gross estate.18                                                             

               16The District Court stated:  "when Congress passed Section            
          1341 it did not intend to recognize a debt of the Government to             
          the taxpayer during his lifetime and deny the same obligation to            
          his personal representatives and to his estate."  Estate of Good            
          v. United States, 208 F. Supp. 521, 523 (E.D. Mich. 1962); see              
          also Nalty v. United States, 35 AFTR 2d 75-1449, 75-1 USTC par.             
          9441 (1975); Estate of Stein v. Commissioner, 37 T.C. 945, 958              
          (1962).                                                                     
               17While we recognize that the parties in Estate of Good v.             
          United States, supra at 523, agreed that the gross estate would             
          be increased by the amount of any sec. 1341(a) relief, we                   
          nevertheless find the reasoning in the District Court's opinion             
          persuasive.                                                                 
               18In United States v. Simmons, 346 F.2d 213, 214 (5th Cir.             
          1965), the decedent paid a deficiency in his Federal income                 
          taxes, and the attorney for his estate filed a claim for refund             
          following his death.  After the refund claim was disallowed, the            
          estate filed suit.  The refund litigation was eventually settled,           
          and a refund was paid.  In the interim, the estate had filed its            
          estate tax return listing the income tax claim as having no value           
          but requesting that the estate tax liability be held in abeyance            
          pending the outcome of the claim.  The Commissioner determined              
          that the claim was includable in the decedent's estate and valued           
          the claim at the amount of the settlement.  Although the estate             
          conceded that the claim was includable in the gross estate, it              
          contended that the claim had no value at the time of the                    
          decedent's death.                                                           
                                                             (continued...)           




Page:  Previous  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011