- 15 -
children had an implied agreement that decedent could retain for
his lifetime the right to the income from all of the real
property that the partnership had when decedent died. Thus,
decedent did not curtail his enjoyment of the transferred
property after he transferred it to the trust and partnership.
Decedent’s estate tax return states that when decedent died
he had personal property, a car, and $2,389 cash, and he was owed
a $429 Federal income tax refund and a $733 medical refund.
Decedent apparently conveyed nearly all of his assets to the
trust and partnership.7 This suggests that decedent had an
implied agreement with his children that he could continue to use
those assets. Cf. Estate of Paxton v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 785,
810 (1986).
b. Whether Decedent Transferred Property to the Trust
and Partnership To Prevent Decedent From Treating
the Property Imprudently, To Settle Family
Disharmony, and To Give Children Control Over
Assets
Petitioner contends that decedent formed the partnership to
prevent him from treating the transferred property imprudently.
We disagree because decedent controlled the partnership, and he
had the power to act alone on behalf of the trust which was the
7 Based on the estate tax return for decedent’s estate and
Hannah’s records, respondent alleges that decedent gave about 98
percent of his property to the partnership. Petitioner’s only
response was that respondent’s allegation is not based on the
record and is “unsupported by calculations.” Respondent’s 98-
percent estimate appears to be reasonable.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011