- 81 -
donative intent because such savings translate almost dollar for
dollar into the enhancement of the net value that decedent could
gratuitously transfer to family members. Consequently, the
transfers to WCB Holdings and BFLP (together, the transfers) were
not free of donative intent. That being the case, the transfers
were not, in the terms of section 25.2512-8, Gift Tax Regs., made
in the ordinary course of business, and there is no presumption
that either the WCB Holdings membership units received by
decedent for his Empak shares or the 99-percent limited
partnership interest in BFLP received by decedent for his WCB
class B membership units constituted full consideration for those
transfers. Id.
Therefore, to establish that the transfers were for full
consideration, petitioner must, for each transfer, establish that
the value of the property transferred by decedent did not exceed
the cash value of the property received by him. Id. By the
explicit terms of section 25.2512-8, Gift Tax Regs., the
resulting inquiry is limited to an economic calculus, and there
is no room for any inquiry as to the transferor’s (decedent’s)
state of mind. Yet the majority makes his state of mind
critical:
Decedent * * * received [an interest] in WCB Holdings
proportionate to the number of Empak shares * * * [he]
contributed. Although by itself this may not be
sufficient evidence to meet the adequate and full
consideration requirement, two additional facts do
support such a finding. We have determined that the
Page: Previous 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011