- 40 -
“entitled to all the income” from the trust created by the 1993
will. See id. at 677.
The fact that the 1993 will does not make specific provision
for the disposition of the income in excess of the amount Jo
needed does not establish decedent’s intention that there would
be no excess income. See id. at 675. The 1993 will provides
that upon Jo’s death the trust “will then be liquidated and the
proceeds given to my grandson, BARNEY PETER ARONSON, * * * or if
BARNEY PETER ARONSON predecease me, SCOTT HALEY ARONSON shall
take his place as my heir”. This bequest makes no distinction
between trust corpus and trust income. It is therefore clear
that decedent intended a gift of the corpus and the undistributed
income component of the trust to Bar (or Scott Haley Aronson if
Bar was deceased) after Jo died. See id.
The 1993 will, as executed by decedent, and as in existence
at the time of his death, fails to establish that Jo is
“unqualifiedly designated as the life beneficiary”. Furthermore,
the 1993 will does not designate Jo as the “sole income
beneficiary for life.” Sec. 20.2056(b)-5(f), Estate Tax Regs.
Instead, the 1993 will limits Jo’s trust income to the amount she
would “need”. Any excess would go to the remainderman. Under
the trust at issue, Jo is not “entitled to all the income” from
the property within the meaning of section 2056(b)(7)(B)(ii), and
Page: Previous 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011