- 18 -
some authority that could handle that, certainly
not a private arrangement.
Even if the Historic Site Language is read with Mr. Lanier's
testimony as manifesting decedent’s intention to transfer her
home in order to preserve it as a historical site, the latitude
given to the trustees in accomplishing this objective was wide.
First, there is no charitable intent on the part of the decedent
that is discernible from the language of the Trust or even from
Mr. Lanier's testimony. Second, as respondent points out, there
were various ways to preserve the decedent's home as a historic
site, without transferring it to a qualifying charitable,
educational, literary, or scientific organization. Specifically,
respondent points out that an arrangement whereby a private party
lived in the house and designated it as a historic landmark would
have complied with the decedent's intentions, as she had
expressed them to Mr. Lanier.6
Petitioner argues that United States v. Leonhardt, 37 AFTR
2d 76-1589, 76-1 USTC par. 13,138 (M.D. Fla. 1976), supports its
entitlement to an estate tax deduction. In that case, decedent's
will established a residuary trust, with the net income to be
distributed to three named beneficiaries for life; following
their deaths, the undistributed income and corpus were to be
6 The Secretary of the Interior approves the designation
of properties as historical landmarks or their inclusion in the
National Register of Historical Places, including properties that
are privately owned and not owned by qualified charities. See
National Historic Preservation Act, Pub. L. 89-665, sec. 101, 80
Stat. 915 (1966), 16 U.S.C. secs. 470 and 470a (1994).
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011