- 28 - $711,841 of coal royalties, dividends, and interest received by the estate during 1980-92. Respondent also determined that decedent did not exercise her right to receive this investment income, but instead allowed its economic benefit to be enjoyed by the children. Respondent further determined that decedent thereby made indirect gifts of the investment income to the children, which gifts are "taxable gifts" for purposes of section 2503 and the other estate and gift tax provisions of the Code. After having reviewed petitioner's responses to certain interrogatories, respondent, by amended answer, asserted that decedent had become entitled to an additional $332,945 of the investment income of Garry's estate. Respondent further asserted that decedent similarly made taxable gifts of this additional income to the children. The entire increased deficiency asserted in the amended answer is attributable to the asserted gifts of this additional investment income.8 Respondent made several concessions after the amended answer. Respondent now maintains that decedent became entitled to a total of only $999,769 of the investment income of Garry's estate during the period extending from Garry's death in 1979 to 8 With respect to the deficiency determined in the notice, respondent's determination is presumed to be correct; petitioner bears the burden of proving it wrong. See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111 (1933). Respondent bears the burden of proof with respect to the increased deficiency asserted in the amended answer. See Rule 142(a).Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011