- 17 - the transaction creates an entity with separate existence under State law. See Zmuda v. Commissioner, supra at 720. We have decided several cases involving multitiered trust arrangements where the Commissioner alleged that the trust structure lacked economic substance and, therefore, had to be disregarded for Federal income tax purposes. See, e.g., Muhich v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-192, affd. 238 F.3d 860 (7th Cir. 2001); Dahlstrom v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-264, affd. without published opinion 999 F.2d 1579 (5th Cir. 1993); Clawson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1982-321. In deciding whether a purported trust lacks economic substance, we consider the following factors: (1) Whether the taxpayer’s relationship, as grantor, to property purportedly transferred into trust differed materially before and after the trust’s formation; (2) whether the trust had a bona fide independent trustee; (3) whether an economic interest in the trust passed to trust beneficiaries other than the grantor; and (4) whether the taxpayer honored restrictions imposed by the trust or by the law of trusts. See Markosian v. Commissioner, supra at 1243-1245. A. The Castros’ Relationship to the Trusts’ Property The first factor we consider is whether petitioner’s relationship, as grantor, to property ostensibly transferred into trust differed materially before and after the trusts’ formation. See id. at 1243. The Castros lived in the same home with the same furnishings as they had before their home and furnishings were transferredPage: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011