- 10 -
decedent’s power to withdraw, which had not lapsed as of the date
of decedent’s death, was a general power of appointment that
should have been reported in Schedule H, Powers of Appointment,
of the estate tax return (Schedule H). Consequently, respondent
increased decedent’s total gross estate and taxable estate by
$76,797, which is 5 percent times the value ($1,535,950.58) of
the trust as of the date of decedent’s death.
Discussion
The estate bears the burden of proving that the determina-
tions in the notice are erroneous. See Rule 142(a);2 Welch v.
Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). That this case was submit-
ted fully stipulated does not change that burden or the effect of
a failure of proof. See Rule 122(b); Borchers v. Commissioner,
95 T.C. 82, 91 (1990), affd. 943 F.2d 22 (8th Cir. 1991).
November 1995 Checks and January 1996 Checks
The parties’ dispute with respect to the November 1995
checks and the January 1996 checks is whether the transfers of
funds represented by those checks constitute nontaxable gifts
made by decedent. If they do not, the parties agree that the
amounts of funds withdrawn by those checks from the Seafirst
joint account are includible in decedent’s gross estate.
2All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice
and Procedure. Unless otherwise indicated, all section refer-
ences are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect on the date of
decedent’s death.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011