- 25 - 7-601(b) would have been $1,012.77 ($11,253 x 9%), and not $32,237 as claimed by the estate.9 We also reject the estate’s position that “Meeting the tests for allowability by local law, it [the amount of executors’ fees claimed by the estate] is also allowable by federal law.” In determining the deductibility of administration expenses under section 2053(a)(2), the deductions claimed must be allowable not only by the State law under which the estate is administered but also by Federal law. See Estate of Love v. Commissioner, 923 F.2d 335, 337 (4th Cir. 1991), affg. T.C. Memo. 1989-470; Estate of Smith v. Commissioner, 510 F.2d 479, 482-483 (2d Cir. 1975), affg. 57 T.C. 650 (1972); Estate of Posen v. Commissioner, 75 T.C. 355, 367 (1980). To satisfy Federal law, the deductions claimed as administration expenses must satisfy the requirements of section 2053 and the regulations thereunder. 9Respondent concedes that the estate is entitled to deduct executors’ fees determined under Md. Code Ann., Est. & Trusts, sec. 7-601(b). However, respondent made a mathematical error in determining the value of decedent’s non-Trust property and, consequently, made an error in calculating the maximum amount of executors’ fees allowable under Md. Code Ann., Est. & Trusts, sec. 7-601(b). Respondent calculated the value of decedent’s non-Trust property to be $10,997 and the maximum compensation of a personal representative under Md. Code Ann., Est. & Trusts, sec. 7-601(b) to be $990 ($10,997 x 9%). In fact, the value of decedent’s non-Trust property was $11,253, consisting of $256 in cash and traveler’s checks, life insurance valued at $1,025, $7,228 in a jointly owned money market mutual fund, and $2,744 of other miscellaneous property.Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011