- 36 -
of decedent existing at the date of her death. Therefore, the 60
percent of the settlement proceeds payable to the Glovers under
that agreement is not deductible as a claim against the estate
within the meaning of section 2053(a)(3).
Moreover, when founded on a promise or agreement, the
deduction for a claim against an estate is allowed only to the
extent that the claim was contracted bona fide and for an adequate
and full consideration in money or money’s worth. Sec.
2053(c)(1)(A); sec. 20.2053-4, Estate Tax Regs. The “bona fide”
and “consideration” elements in section 2053(c)(1)(A) are related
but separate requirements; and if either is missing, the deduction
fails. Estate of Scholl v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1265, 1279
(1987). The requirement of an adequate and full consideration in
money or money’s worth may not be predicated solely on the fact
that the contract is enforceable under State law. United States v.
Stapf, 375 U.S. 118, 130-131 (1963). The requirement of
“‘consideration in money or money’s worth’ * * * invokes a higher
standard of consideration than that required to establish the
validity of a contract under State law”. Estate of Carli v.
Commissioner, 84 T.C. 649, 658 (1985).
A State trial court decree having Federal estate tax
implications does not automatically bind the Commissioner if the
Commissioner was not a party to the proceeding. Commissioner v.
Estate of Bosch, 387 U.S. 456 (1967); Estate of Rowan v.
Page: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011