-47- essential task is to “separate the true nontax reasons for the [entities’] formation from those that merely clothe transfer tax savings motives.” Estate of Bongard v. Commissioner, supra at __ (slip op. at 44). It must be recognized, however, that “Legitimate nontax purposes are often inextricably interwoven with testamentary objectives.” Id. Furthermore, with respect to the particular case at bar, the Court must be cognizant of any potential divergence between decedent’s actual motives and the concerns of his advisers. The estate’s position is that Schutt I and II were “formed primarily to put into place an entity to perpetuate Mr. Schutt’s buy and hold investment philosophy with respect to the DuPont and Exxon stock belonging both to Mr. Schutt and to the Wilmington Trust Company Trusts.” In service of this objective, Schutt I and II were aimed at “the furtherance and protection of * * * [decedent’s] family’s wealth by providing for the centralized management of his family’s holdings in duPont [sic] stock and Exxon stock during his lifetime and to prevent the improvident disposition of this stock during his lifetime and to the extent possible after his death.” The estate contends that the desired preservation of decedent’s investment policy “could not be accomplished without the creation of Schutt I and Schutt II, as the WTC Trusts were scheduled to terminate at various intervalsPage: Previous 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011