- 21 - 3. Selling Ripplestone Benefited the Trust C Beneficiaries We believe that a principal reason for selling Ripplestone was not to pay taxes owed by decedent's estate, but to accommodate the 28 beneficiaries of Trust C. Ripplestone could not readily be divided for distribution to 28 beneficiaries. As we said in our original opinion, the desire to accommodate those 28 beneficiaries would not make the costs of maintaining and selling Ripplestone deductible by decedent's estate. E. Conclusion An estate may deduct expenses that are necessarily incurred. Sec. 20.2053-3(a), Estate Tax Regs. Trust B had enough liquid assets, such as income it had received, to pay any potential taxes. It was not necessary for Trust B to hold Ripplestone after March 16, 1990, and later sell it. Thus, the expenses of maintaining and selling Ripplestone after March 16, 1990, are not deductible as administration expenses under section 2053(a) and section 20.2053-3(a) and (d)(2), Estate Tax Regs.9 To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered under Rule 155. 9 As a result of this conclusion, under the two-part test established by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Estate of Millikin v. Commissioner, 125 F.3d 339 (6th Cir. 1997) (en banc), vacating 106 F.3d 1263 (6th Cir. 1997) and revg. and remanding T.C. Memo. 1995-288, we need not decide whether the expenses to keep and sell Ripplestone after Mar. 16, 1990, were necessary administration expenses under Ohio law.Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Last modified: May 25, 2011