-433-
when the donee relinquishes control over the property to the
donee. See, e.g., Goldstein v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 535, 542
(1988).
The record shows that Kanter did not make a payment to JUF
during 1982. In short, THC forwarded to JUF a $15,000 promissory
note payable to Kanter along with a letter which stated: “THC
will pay its note to Kanter, who will, in turn, see to providing
these funds to JUF.” In accordance with this letter, THC paid
$15,370 to Kanter in February 1983, and Kanter forwarded $15,000
to JUF at that time.
On these facts, it is evident Kanter did not endorse the
promissory note over to JUF during 1982 or otherwise relinquish
control of the promissory note to JUF at any time. In the
absence of a payment to JUF during 1982 within the meaning of
section 170(a), it follows that the Kanters are not entitled to a
charitable contribution deduction for 1982. Nevertheless, Kanter
did make a $15,000 charitable contribution to JUF during 1983,
and, thus, the Kanters are entitled to a deduction for that year,
subject to the adjusted gross income limitations of section
170(b).
Page: Previous 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011