- 33 -
“motivated by a philanthropic impulse” or by an intention to
“make a contribution to the United States.” Markham v.
Commissioner, 39 B.T.A. 465, 471 (1939) (disallowing a charitable
deduction claimed as a contribution for the use of the United
States for moneys the taxpayer expended in obtaining evidence to
be used in a criminal prosecution). Rather, the gift tax
payments were made for the entirely private purpose of satisfying
decedent’s gift tax liabilities. Just as “not every payment to
an organization which qualifies as a charity is a charitable
contribution”, Estate of Wood v. Commissioner, 39 T.C. 1, 6
(1962), not every payment to a governmental entity qualifies as a
transfer for exclusively public purposes under section
2055(a)(1), cf. Continental Ill. Natl. Bank & Trust Co. v. United
States, 185 Ct. Cl. 642, 403 F.2d 721 (1968) (“It seems to us
that the word ‘public’ [as used in section 2055(a)(1)] * * *
envisions gifts to domestic governmental bodies”); Osborne v.
Commissioner, 87 T.C. 575 (1986) (disallowing a charitable
deduction for a taxpayer’s transfers to a municipality of certain
drainage facilities, to the extent the facilities improved his
own property).
The legislative history indicates that Congress intended the
section 2055(a) deduction to apply only to donative transfers.
Section 2055(a) originated in section 403(a)(3) of the Revenue
Act of 1918, ch. 18, 40 Stat. 1098, which allowed a deduction
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011