- 38 -
On the record before us, we find that petitioners in each of
these cases have failed to carry their burden of establishing
that all of the essential elements of a bona fide inter vivos
gift were present on December 31, 1999 (or at any other time in
1999) with respect to KQC’s claimed noncash charitable contribu-
tion to TMC. We shall address only whether one of those elements
was present on that date (or at any other time in 1999), viz,
whether KQC made an irrevocable transfer to TMC of legal title to
the improved property on Maple Street or to any portion of such
property. That is because our resolution of that question is
determinative of the issue under section 170 presented in these
cases.
In support of their position that in 1999 KQC made an
irrevocable transfer to TMC of legal title to the improved
property on Maple Street or to the 1958 school building and the
new building on KQC’s land,14 petitioners argue:
13(...continued)
(1) Although KQC intended to make a gift to TMC, KQC did not make
a gift to TMC; (2) KQC did not irrevocably transfer to TMC legal
title to and control over the improved property on Maple Street
or any portion of such property; (3) KQC did not deliver a gift
to TMC; and (4) TMC did not accept KQC’s claimed noncash charita-
ble contribution to TMC.
14In KQC’s 1999 return, KQC reported KQC’s claimed noncash
charitable contribution to TMC of the improved property on Maple
Street, i.e., KQC’s land and 1958 school building that KQC
purchased in 1997 and any improvements made by TMC to that
property, including the new building that TMC constructed with
HHS’s grant funds. On brief, petitioners appear to muddle their
position as to what they claim KQC gave to TMC on Dec. 31, 1999.
(continued...)
Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011