Ithaca Trust Co v. United States
| Decision Date | 08 April 1929 |
| Docket Number | No. 267,267 |
| Citation | 49 S.Ct. 291,279 U.S. 151,73 L.Ed. 647 |
| Parties | ITHACA TRUST CO. v. UNITED STATES |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. A. F. Prescott, Jr., Simon Lyon, and R. B. H. Lyon, all of Washington D. C., for petitioner.
Mr. W. D. Mitchell, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., for the United states.
[Argument of Counsel from page 152 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a suit to recover the amount of taxes alleged to have been illegally collected under the Revenue Act of 1918, February 24, 1919, c. 18; 40 Stat. 1057, in view of the deductions allowed by section 403(a)(3), 40 Stat. 1098. The Court of Claims denied the claim, 64 Ct. Cl. 686, and a writ of certiorari was granted by this Court.
On June 15, 1921, Edwin C. Stewart died, appointing his wife and the Ithaca Trust Company executors and the Ithaca Trust Company trustee of the trusts created by his will. He gave the residue of his estate to his wife for life with authority to use from the principal any sum 'that may be necessary to suitably maintain her in as much comfort as she now enjoys.' After the death of the wife there were bequests in trust for admitted charities. The case presents two questions the first of which is whether the provision for the maintainence of the wife made the gifts to charity so uncertain that the deduction of the amount of those gifts from the gross estate under section 403(a)(3), supra, in order to ascertain the estate tax, cannot be allowed. Humes v. United States, 276 U. S. 487, 494, 48 S. Ct. 347, 72 L. Ed. 667. This we are of opinion must be answered in the negative. The principal that could be used was only so much as might be necessary to continue the comfort then enjoyed. The standard was fixed in fact and capable of being stated in definite terms of money. It was not left to the widow's discretion. The income of the estate at the death of the testator and even after debts and specific legacies had been paid was more than sufficient to maintain the widow as required. There was no uncertainty appreciably greater than the general uncertainty that attends human affairs.
The second question is raised by the accident of the widow having died within the year granted by the statute, section 404, and regulations, for filing the return showing the deductions allowed by section 403, the value of the net estate and the tax paid or payable thereon. By section 403(a)(3) the net estate taxed is ascertained by deducting among other things gifts to charity such as were made in this case. But as those gifts were subject to the life estate of the widow of course their value was diminished by the postponement that would last while the widow lived. The question is whether the amount of the diminution, that is, the length of the postponement, is to be determined by the event as it turned out, of the widow's death within six months, or by mortality tables showing the probabilities as they stood on the day when the testator died. The first impression is that it is absurd to resort to statistical probabilities when you know the fact. But this is due to inaccurate thinking. The estate so far as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Blodgett v. Guaranty Trust Co. of New York
... ... avenues of tax avoidance. In consequence, the inheritance tax ... statutes of most of the states imposing taxes of that ... character include, among the taxable transfers, those made in ... several estates involved, upon certain recent decisions of ... the Supreme Court of the United States, as evincing a ... departure in effect from the decisions above referred to, and ... receipt of property by the legatees." Ithaca Trust ... Co. v. United States (1929) 279 U.S. 151, 155, 49 S.Ct ... 291, 73 L.Ed. 647; Corbin ... ...
-
Continental Ill. Nat. B. & T. Co. of Chicago v. United States
...and devisees succeed on death, but upon the interest which ceases by reason of death. Again, in Ithaca Trust Co. v. United States, 279 U.S. 151, 49 S.Ct. 291, 73 L.Ed. 647 (1929), the Supreme Court declared that the estate tax was a tax on the act of the testator, not on the receipt of the ......
-
Salisbury v. United States
...objective standard fixed by the terms of the will that is capable of being stated in terms of money. Ithaca Trust Co. v. United States, 279 U.S. 151, 154, 49 S.Ct. 291, 73 L.Ed. 647 (1929). Absent a measurable standard limiting the power of invasion, the charitable deduction is disallowed, ......
-
Booher v. United States
...actuarially calculable amount? Humes v. United States, 276 U.S. 487 48 S.Ct. 347, 72 L.Ed. 667 (1928); Ithaca Trust Co. v. United States, 279 U.S. 151 49 S.Ct. 291, 73 L.Ed. 647 (1929); Merchants National Bank v. Commissioner, 320 U.S. 256 64 S.Ct. 108, 88 L.Ed. 35 (1943); Henslee v. Union ......
-
Tax Aspects of Valuation and Net Income
...value, except to the extent that they were reasonably foreseeable at the date of valuation. See, e.g., Ithaca Trust Co. v. United States , 279 U.S. 151 (1929); Estate of Van Horne v. Commissioner , 720 F.2d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir.1983), affg., 78 T.C. 728 (1982), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 980 (19......
-
Are Grats Still Great After Recent Irs Rulings and Regulations and Rising Federal Rates?
...1980-11 C.B. 194; Estate ofFabric, 83 TC. 932 (1984); and Estate ofMcLendon, IC Memo 1993-459 (1993). 123. Ithaca Trust Co. v. U. S., 279 U.S. 151 (1929); Nat'l Bank ofKenosha, 763 F. 2d 891 (7th Cir., 1985); Estate ofvan Horne, 720 F. 2d 1114 (9th cir., 1983) cert den. 466 U.S. 980; Estate......
-
Significant recent developments in estate planning.
...TC 860 (1978). (15) The Ahmanson Foundation, 674 F2d 761 (9th Cir. 1981)(48 AFTR2d 81-6317, 81-2 USTC [paragraph]13,438); Ithaca Trust Co., 279 US 151 (1929)(7 AFTR 8856, 1 USTC [paragraph]386); Charles M. Land, 303 F2d 170 (5th Cir. 1962)(9 AFTR2d 1955, 62-1 USTC [paragraph]12,078), cert. ......
-
Significant recent developments in estate planning.
...990 F2d 136 (4th Cir. 1993)(71 AFTR2d [paragraph] 149,086, 93-1 USTC [paragraph] 60,131), aff'g 97 TC 368 (1991). (67) Ithaca Trust Co., 279 US 151 (1929)(7 AFTR 8856, 1 USTC [paragraph] 1386). (68) Est. of Dorothy J. Warren, 981 F2d 776 (5th Cir. 1993)(71 AFTR2d [paragraph] 149,082, 93-1 U......