- 8 -
taxed in the same degree as other property over which
he exercises the same authority. * * * [H. Rept. 767,
65th Cong. 2d Sess. 41-42 (1918), 1939-1 C.B. (Part 2)
86, 101.]
In Estate of Mellinger v. Commissioner, supra at 35-36, we
reasoned that although section 2044 required that property held
by the QTIP trust be included in Harriett’s (i.e., the surviving
spouse’s) gross estate, the property “[did] not actually pass to
or from” her, and that she “at no time” possessed “control” or
had “any power of disposition over” the property. Unlike
Harriett, who could not control the ultimate disposition of the
property held by the QTIP trust, Aldo possessed a testamentary
GPA, which allowed him to control the ultimate disposition of the
stock. Thus, pursuant to the GPA, Aldo, at the moment of death
(i.e., the critical moment for estate tax valuation purposes),
had control and power of disposition over the property.
Accordingly, the Ledyard stock subject to Aldo’s testamentary GPA
must be aggregated with Ledyard stock Aldo owned outright.
2. Family Attribution Rules
The estate further contends that aggregation is
inappropriate because the Ledyard stock held by Trust A should
not be attributed to Aldo. The estate, relying primarily on
Propstra v. United States, 680 F.2d 1248 (9th Cir. 1982), Estate
of Bright v. United States, 658 F.2d 999 (5th Cir. 1981), and
Estate of Bonner v. United States, supra, and sections 267, 318,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011