- 20 -
unusual. Cf. Gutchess v. Commissioner, 46 T.C. 554, 557 (1966)
(where a husband transferred his entire interest in a homestead
property to his wife, who then allowed him to live in the house
without charge, the donor's continued use and enjoyment is a
natural use which does not diminish the wife's enjoyment and
possession). In this case, decedent's continued use and
possession of parcel 3, of which she owned a controlling
interest, is natural in light of the children's minority
ownership. It is not surprising that the children did not seek
to partition the property, since they also used the property
regularly and they had only a minority interest in the property.
In addition to the objective facts, our decision rests
heavily on Dean’s testimony that there was no understanding
between decedent and her children. While his testimony was
clearly self-serving, Dean's testimony was straightforward,
unequivocal, and credible. Respondent’s counsel chose not to
cross-examine him on this point. Because we credit his
testimony, we hold that petitioner has carried its burden of
proving that there was no implied agreement. Cf. Hendry v.
Commissioner, 62 T.C. 861, 872 (1974).
II. Taxable Gifts Adjustment
The second issue is whether decedent rented ranch property
to her children at a below-market rate, thereby making a taxable
gift to her children. In the notice of deficiency, respondent
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