- 42 - not required to introduce any additional or different evidence than petitioner already has introduced to prove that the values of the Marital Fund assets should not be included in decedent’s gross estate under section 2041(a)(2). The record already contains the necessary evidence for us to decide whether decedent transferred her interest in Marital Fund assets to GFLP or to its partners before her death and, if she did not, whether decedent held a general power of appointment over Marital Fund assets on the date of her death. As a result, we will consider respondent’s argument regarding the application of section 2041(a)(2) as necessary. III. Whether Decedent Completed Transfers of Marital Fund Assets Before Her Death A. The Alleged Withdrawal and Transfers On January 8, 1997, decedent executed an assignment that provided for the withdrawal of all of the assets from the Marital Fund and for the following transfers of Marital Fund assets: 1. The transfer of Marital Fund assets having a value of $100,000 to the Pamela Powell Trust for no consideration; 40(...continued) of Kurz v. Commissioner, 101 T.C. 44 (1993), supplemented T.C. Memo. 1994-221, affd. 68 F.3d 1027 (7th Cir. 1995). In addition, respondent’s position on brief conflicts with the admission made in his answer in docket No. 467-02 that “the Sidney Gore revocable trust provided for a marital trust, as to the principal of which decedent, Sylvia Gore, had a general power of appointment.”Page: Previous 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007