Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Krebs, 6319

Decision Date04 June 1937
Docket NumberNo. 6319,6320.,6319
Citation90 F.2d 880
PartiesCOMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. KREBS (two cases).
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

James W. Morris, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sewall Key and Berryman Green, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Richard B. Barker, of Washington, D. C. (Ivins, Phillips, Graves & Barker, of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for respondent.

Before BUFFINGTON and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges, and MARIS, District Judge.

THOMPSON, Circuit Judge.

These are petitions for review of two decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals. In 1932 the taxpayer created three irrevocable trusts for the benefit of each of his three children. He transferred to each of those trusts without any valuable consideration, $5,000. In 1933, without any valuable consideration, he transferred to each of the trusts 50 shares of Dupont Company stock of the value of $4,712.50 and cash in the following amounts: $656.37, $667.88, and $658.25. In the same year he created three additional irrevocable trusts with the same beneficiaries and transferred to each of the three trusts 150 shares of Krebs Estate, Inc., common stock of the value of $47,144.25. Each of the trust instruments directed the trustee to use the income from the trust fund for the support, maintenance, benefit, and education of the named beneficiary until such beneficiary attained the age of twenty-five. Unexpended income was to be paid directly to the beneficiary or to his issue, appointees, or distributees. The taxpayer reserved the privilege of acting in an advisory capacity to the trustee. Some variations in the trust instruments, not pertinent to the question herein involved, are omitted from our consideration. The instruments creating all of the trusts contained the following provision:

"No beneficiary shall have any right to or interest in any of the income of the trust until the date upon which Trustee shall, according to the terms of this agreement, pay such income to such beneficiary and then only if such beneficiary be living on that date."

In making his gift tax returns for the taxable years 1932 and 1933, the taxpayer deducted $5,000 from the value of the gifts to each of the trusts, claiming such right under section 504(a) and (b) of the Revenue Act of 1932 (26 U.S.C.A. § 553(a, b).

The Commissioner decided that the transfers were gifts of future interests in property, disallowed the claimed deductions on that ground, and assessed a deficiency. The Board of Tax Appeals held that the transfers were gifts of present interests and that the taxpayer was entitled to make the deductions by reason of section 504(b) of the Revenue Act of 1932 (26 U.S.C.A. § 553(b). That act provides:

Section 501(a): "For the calendar year 1932 and each calendar year thereafter a tax, computed as provided in section 502 section 551, shall be imposed upon the transfer during such calendar year by any individual, resident, or non-resident, of property by gift.

"(b) The tax shall apply whether the transfer is in trust or otherwise, whether the gift is direct or indirect, and whether the property is real or personal, tangible or intangible." 26 U.S.C.A. § 550(a, b).

Section 504(a): "The term `net gifts' means the total amount of gifts made during the calendar year, less the deductions provided in section 505 section 554.

"(b) In the case of gifts (other than of future interests in property) made to any person by the donor during the calendar year, the first $5,000 of such gifts to such person shall not, for the purposes of subse...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Bank of New York v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 9 Julio 1970
    ...43 Stat. 314 ($500 deduction). But cf. Supplee v. Smith, 242 F.2d 855, 859-860 (3d Cir. 1957), overruling Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Krebs, 90 F.2d 880 (3d Cir. 1937) (no exclusion for gifts into trust under 1932 23 S.Rep.No.627, 78th Cong., 1st Sess. 92-94 (1943); see Supplee v. S......
  • Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Brandegee
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • 30 Octubre 1941
    ...beneficiaries. The Commissioner, feeling himself constrained by Commissioner v. Wells, 7 Cir., 1937, 88 F.2d 339, and Commissioner v. Krebs, 3 Cir., 1937, 90 F.2d 880, ruled that the trust estate, rather than the beneficiaries severally, must be considered to be the donee; and hence allowed......
  • Wisotzkey v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • 10 Agosto 1944
    ...D.C.Mass., 20 F.Supp. 31; Commissioner v. Kempner, 5 Cir., 126 F.2d 853; Smith v. Commissioner, 8 Cir., 131 F.2d 254; Commissioner v. Krebs, 3 Cir., 90 F.2d 880. We give very brief consideration to these Commissioner v. Wells was specifically overruled by Commissioner v. Gardner, 7 Cir., 12......
  • Stockstrom v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 10744.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • 29 Marzo 1951
    ...use for the directed purpose * * *" and, consequently, that such gifts are transfers of present interests. In Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Krebs, 90 F.2d 880, 881, decided by the Third Circuit on June 4, 1937, Krebs had established an irrevocable trust for each of his three children.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT