- 37 -
ments of a bona fide inter vivos gift) must be present:
(1) a donor competent to make the gift; (2) a
donee capable of taking the gift; (3) a clear
and unmistakable intention on the part of the
donor to absolutely and irrevocably divest
himself of the title, dominion, and control
of the subject matter of the gift, in
praesenti; (4) the irrevocable transfer of
the present legal title and of the dominion
and control of the entire gift to the donee,
so that the donor can exercise no further act
of dominion or control over it; (5) a deliv-
ery by the donor to the donee of the subject
of the gift or of the most effectual means of
commanding the dominion of it; (6) acceptance
of the gift by the donee * * *
Guest v. Commissioner, 77 T.C. 9, 15-16 (1981) (quoting Weil v.
Commissioner, 31 B.T.A. 899, 906 (1934), affd. 82 F.2d 561 (5th
Cir. 1936)).
The parties disagree over whether all of the essential
elements of a bona fide inter vivos gift were present on December
31, 1999, with respect to KQC’s claimed noncash charitable
contribution to TMC. According to petitioners, all of those
elements were present on that date. Although respondent agrees
that certain of those elements were present on December 31, 1999,
respondent disagrees that all of those elements were present on
that date (or at any other time in 1999).13
13Respondent acknowledges, inter alia, that KQC owned and
was thus competent to make a gift of KQC’s land and 1958 school
building. However, respondent contends that KQC did not own, and
that the U.S. Government had an interest in, the new building
that TMC constructed on KQC’s land with HHS’s grant funds. As a
result, according to respondent, KQC was not competent to give
the new building to TMC. Respondent also contends that in 1999:
(continued...)
Page: Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011