Estate of Anna Soberdash, Deceased, Wilma Porada and Mary Ann Lacek, Co-Executrices - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         
          2044(a) to any property if a deduction was allowed with respect             
          to the transfer of such property to the decedent under section              
          2056(b)(7).  See Estate of Cavenaugh v. Commissioner, 100 T.C.              
          407, 417 (1993), affd. in part on this issue and revd. in part 51           
          F.3d 597, 599-601 (5th Cir. 1995).                                          
               Under Andrew's will, decedent was entitled to all the income           
          from the Marital Trust, payable quarterly, and no person had any            
          power to appoint any part of the principal of the Marital Trust             
          to any other person.  Thus, decedent had a qualifying income                
          interest for life under sections 2056(b)(7)(B)(ii)(I) and (II)              
          and 2044(a).  Andrew's estate was allowed a deduction under                 
          section 2056(b)(7) for $1,507,881.39 of the assets distributed to           
          the Marital Trust under Article Five of Andrew's will.  This                
          satisfies section 2044(b)(1)(A).  It follows that the value as of           
          decedent's death of the QTIP deducted by Andrew's estate must be            
          included in decedent's gross estate.                                        
               Petitioner does not argue that the terms of Andrew's will              
          and the Marital Trust are inconsistent with the foregoing                   
          analysis.  Rather, petitioner appears to object to inclusion in             
          the gross estate because the Marital Trust was allegedly                    
          mismanaged by its trustees.2  Petitioner contends that as a                 
          result of such mismanagement, not all the income was paid to                
          decedent or for her benefit and that principal was appointed                

               2Petitioner has not established that such mismanagement                
          occurred.                                                                   




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011