- 46 -
Memo. 1987-8; and Church v. United States, 85 AFTR 2d 2000-804,
2000-1 USTC par. 60,369 (W.D. Tex. 2000), affd. without published
opinion 268 F.3d 1063 (5th Cir. 2001). The estate apparently
argues that the just-cited cases establish that a proportionate
partnership interest constitutes per se adequate and full
consideration for contributed assets. We believe, however, that
any such global formulation would overreach what can be drawn
from the decisions.
First, with respect to Estate of Jones v. Commissioner,
supra, Estate of Strangi v. Commissioner, supra, and Shepherd v.
Commissioner, supra, none of these opinions involved section
2036. Rather, they considered whether gifts were made at the
inception of family limited partnership arrangements. Estate of
Jones v. Commissioner, supra at 127-128; Estate of Strangi v.
Commissioner, supra at 489-490; Shepherd v. Commissioner, supra
at 384-389. The cases therefore do not control interpretation of
the requirements of section 2036. Furthermore, while section
2512(b) describes a gift as a transfer of property “for less than
an adequate and full consideration in money or money’s worth”,
there exists an equally fundamental principle that a gift
requires a donee--some other individual must be enriched. In
this connection, we note that Estate of Jones v. Commissioner,
supra at 127-128, and Estate of Strangi v. Commissioner, supra at
489-490, which find no gift at inception, say nothing explicit
Page: Previous 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011