Estate of Mary Catherine IX Gaynor - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          and that the $144,400 value of the property should be included in           
          decedent’s gross estate.                                                    

                                     Discussion                                       
               For Federal estate tax purposes, all interests in property             
          that a decedent possesses at the time of death are includable in            
          the gross estate.  Sec. 2033; Estate of Jalkut v. Commissioner,             
          96 T.C. 675, 678 (1991).                                                    
               Also, the value of property transferred by a decedent prior            
          to death without consideration and with respect to which a                  
          decedent retains a power to revoke the transfer is includable in            
          the decedent’s gross estate.  Sec. 2038(a)(1); Estate of Swanson            
          v. United States, 46 Fed. Cl. 388, 391 (2000).                              
               The legal effect of gifts of property made under a POA is              
          controlled by State law.  Morgan v. Commissioner, 309 U.S. 78, 80           
          (1940); Estate of Swanson v. United States, supra.  In the                  
          absence of a decision or interpretation of State law by a State’s           
          highest court, we look to lower State court rulings and holdings.           
          Commissioner v. Estate of Bosch, 387 U.S. 456, 465 (1967).                  
               The Supreme Court of Connecticut has not addressed whether             
          attorneys-in-fact are authorized under the Act to make gifts of             
          their principal’s property without express language in the POA              
          authorizing gifts to be made.  This issue, however, has been                
          involved in three opinions of the Connecticut Superior Court,               
          Judicial District of Hartford-New Britain.                                  





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011