- 4 -
reflects an increased deficiency over the amount determined in
the estate tax notice of deficiency because in calculating the
estate tax deficiency in the notice, respondent claims, he
erroneously allowed a $1,183,029 gift tax deduction.4 Respondent
argues that no gift tax liability existed because decedent’s
transfer of the Marital Fund assets to the Gore Family Limited
Partnership (GFLP) was incomplete for gift tax purposes.
Respondent contends that in Estate of Gore v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2007-169, we held that the alleged transfer did not
constitute a gift because decedent did not relinquish control
over the Marital Fund assets. In addition, respondent argues
that the decision in the gift tax case, which petitioner
stipulated, reflects that petitioner had no gift tax deficiency
and provides that all gift tax payments be credited against
petitioner’s estate tax deficiency. Removing the gift tax
deduction from his computation and incorporating certain credits
and deductions claimed by petitioner,5 respondent determined an
4 Respondent apparently assumed that the gift tax deficiency
that was the subject of the gift tax case would be sustained by
this Court and calculated the gift tax deduction accordingly.
Though the deduction has turned out to be erroneous, at the time
of its allowance it was consistent with respondent’s position in
the gift tax case. It seems that respondent’s error, if he
committed any, was in not taking an inconsistent position in the
estate tax case to protect the revenue.
5 In his determination, respondent found that petitioner had
not substantiated the $20,814 claimed as executor’s fees or
$55,000 of the $284,406.50 petitioner claimed as death taxes paid
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008