- 22 -
Petitioners have failed to place a value on that obligation.
Indeed, given the circumstances of this case, we have found that
those services cannot be reduced to money or money’s worth. See
supra sec. III.B.
Petitioners’ alleged claim against the estate being founded
upon an agreement, and petitioners having failed to prove an
adequate and full consideration, petitioners are not entitled to
any deduction under section 2503(a)(3). The claim of an
overpayment in estate tax resulting from the first claim for
refund is denied.
V. The Second Claim For Refund
Petitioners claim an overpayment of estate tax on account of
including in the gross estate 100 percent of the value of
decedent’s residence, 325 Wyoming Ave, Cincinnati, Ohio (the
residence). Decedent resided in the residence at the time of his
death. The parties have stipulated that, on or about
September 6, 1985, decedent transferred the residence to himself
and Bell “for their joint lives, remainder to the survivor of
them” (the transfer). In pertinent part, section 2040 provides:
“The value of the gross estate shall include the value of all
property to the extent of the interest therein held as joint
tenants with right of survivorship by the decedent and any other
person”. Respondent, therefore, was correct in including the
value of the residence in the gross estate. Petitioners do not
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011