- 11 -
We agree with respondent. In light of decedent’s extensive
gambling activities, decedent’s large gambling losses, and
decedent’s $10,000 cash payment on the purchase of an automobile
(noteworthy since $10,000 represented approximately one-half of
decedent’s total reported wages for 2000), reasonable questions
have been raised by respondent as to decedent’s sources of cash
and as to decedent’s estate’s net worth on the date of death.
For example, where did decedent in 2000 obtain $7 million to
play the slot machines? What was the source of the $7 million in
cash or credit, and did decedent have some undisclosed source of
funds, or net worth, to make the wagers and to pay the casinos
whatever credit the casinos extended to him?
We do not regard the affidavits submitted (and the
conclusory statements therein by decedent’s wife and by
decedent’s accountant that decedent’s net worth at no time
exceeded $2 million) to be adequate. On the facts of this case
and contrary to the estate’s contention, we regard respondent’s
request for better verification of decedent’s estate’s net worth
as neither “disingenuous” nor “outrageous”.
At one point in the estate’s reply memorandum, to deflect a
negative inference from decedent’s use of $10,000 in cash on the
purchase of an automobile, the estate states: “[after all]
Approximately seven million dollars passed through * * *
[decedent’s] hands in 2000." That is exactly respondent’s point.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011