- 24 -
preserved by RCWA 33.22.130. On the record before us, we reject
the position of the estate that the gift tax regulations on which
the estate relies establish that the payees shown on the November
1995 checks and the January 1996 checks were the recipients of
gifts from decedent.
Based on our examination of the entire record before us, we
find that the estate has failed to show that decedent (or a
legally appointed representative acting on behalf of decedent)
could not have revoked the transfers of funds that decedent’s
children made by the issuance of the November 1995 checks and the
January 1996 checks.7 We further find on that record that the
7Respondent argues in the alternative that, assuming
arguendo the Court were to find that decedent authorized Mr.
Christensen and Ms. Hastie to make gifts of the amounts of funds
withdrawn by the November 1995 checks and the January 1996
checks, four of those checks (i.e., check Nos. 1363, 1364, 1834,
and 1835) were not cashed prior to decedent’s death. Conse-
quently, according to respondent, those four checks did not
result in completed transfers as of the date of decedent’s death
and are includible in decedent’s gross estate. We agree. See
Estate of Gagliardi v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 1207, 1211-1213
(1987).
A gift is not consummated until it is placed beyond the
donor’s recall. See sec. 25.2511-2(b), Gift Tax Regs. State law
determines whether decedent parted with dominion and control over
the funds in the Seafirst joint account that were withdrawn by
the November 1995 checks and the January 1996 checks. See Estate
of Dillingham v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1569, 1575 (1987), affd.
903 F.2d 760 (10th Cir. 1990). Under the law of the State of
Washington, where a donor uses a check to make a gift, the donor
does not immediately relinquish control over the funds repre-
sented by the checks. See Wash. Rev. Code Ann. sec. 62A.3-408
(West 1995). Delivery of the check will not perfect a monetary
gift because the donor may stop payment or withdraw all the funds
in the bank account, thereby effectively revoking the gift. See
(continued...)
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011