- 57 -
GOEKE, J., dissenting: The opinion adopted today reaches an
unjust result, reasoning that the principle of finality requires
that result. The estate and respondent entered into agreed Rule
155 computations and submitted the computations to this Court
with a suggested decision document. The agreed computations
clearly treat the overpayment of tax as an amount separate from
the interest owed by the estate. In arriving at the overpayment
amount of $238,847.24, the parties simply subtracted the estate’s
tax liability ($385,747.17) from its payments that were applied
to the tax liability ($624,594.41). Indeed, the agreed
computations include a chart that lists tax in one column, and
interest in a separate column. See majority op. p. 6. These
computations reveal the parties’ intent not to include interest
in the overpayment amount.
It is obvious from the computations that the separate
treatment of interest and tax was not an accident. Included in
the parties’ agreed computations is the following information:
Total interest due . . . . . . . . $209,943.541
Interest paid . . . . . . . . . . -$144,947.89
Interest not paid for which the
estate was given a deduction . . $64,995.65
1 The amount of total interest due was determined in
reference to the estate’s tax liability of $385,747.17.
The estate is provided an interest deduction for interest on its
estate tax deficiency in the agreed computations, but the
overpayment computation does not take into account that interest.
Page: Previous 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011