Mary Lenore Bullen v. State of Wisconsin, 262
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | Holmes |
| Citation | 60 L.Ed. 830,240 U.S. 625,36 S.Ct. 473 |
| Parties | MARY LENORE BULLEN, George Bullen, Jr., Richard Nixon Bullen, William Graham Bullen, and John Nixon Bullen, Plffs. in Err., v. STATE OF WISCONSIN |
| Docket Number | No. 262,262 |
| Decision Date | 10 April 1916 |
v.
STATE OF WISCONSIN.
Page 626
Messrs. John R. Montgomery, Louis E. Hart, Jasperson Smith, and Lloyd R. Steere for plaintiffs in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 627-629 intentionally omitted]
Page 629
Mr. Walter Drew and Mr. Walter C. Owen, Attorney General of Wisconsin, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court:
This is a proceeding to fix the inheritance tax upon the estate of George Bullen, deceased, a resident of Wisconsin. The supreme court of the state affirmed a judgment for a tax upon a fund of nearly a million dollars which the heirs and next of kin say cannot be taxed in Wisconsin without violating the 14th Amendment and the contract clause of the Constitution of the United States. 143 Wis. 512, 139 Am. St. Rep. 1114, 128 N. W. 109.
The facts are simple. Bullen formery had lived in Chicago, and continued to do some business there after moving to Wisconsin, which he did in 1892. He kept in Chicago the bonds, stocks, and notes constituting the fund, and in 1902 conveyed them to the Northern Trust Company of that city upon certain trusts. In 1904, by virtue of powers reserved, he repossessed himself of the fund, but in 1907 he conveyed it to the company upon the former trusts again. The limitations, so far as material, were of relatively small sums to a sister and niece residing in Massachusetts, and, subject to those gifts of one third of the income to his widow for life and the rest of the income and the principal to his four sons. But the instrument contained the following clause: 'Fifth. I. the donor, expressly reserve the right to direct and control the disposition of the said trust property and estate, to revoke and vacate this trust at any time during my life, to enter into and upon and take possession of the same, or any part thereof, to require a reconveyance to me of the said trust property, or any part thereof, and to dispose of it as I may see fit. During my lifetime the principal and income shall be used for such beneficiaries
Page 630
and in such manner as I may from time to time appoint, and in default of any appointment during my lifetime, and, at all events, after my death, the said income and the said principal shall be applied, paid over or held as herein provided.' It also declared that no portion of principal or income should be paid under some of the leading clauses before Bullen's death, unless by his direction. In fact, be received the whole income during his life. The supreme court held that an inheritance tax was due in respect of the whole fund as upon a transfer intended to take effect in enjoyment after the donor's death.
The deeds of trust were not a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Apt v. Birmingham, Civ. No. 424.
...Superior Oil Co. v. State of Mississippi, 1930, 280 U.S. 390, 395, 396, 50 S.Ct. 169, 74 L.Ed. 504; Bullen v. State of Wisconsin, 1916, 240 U.S. 625, 630, 36 S.Ct. 473, 60 L.Ed. 830; United States v. Isham, 1873, 17 Wall. 496, 84 U.S. 496, 506, 21 L.Ed. 728, Yiannias v. Commissioner, 8 Cir.......
-
Blodgett v. Guaranty Trust Co. of New York
...of acquiring property by inheritance." Keeney v. New York, supra, page 534 of 222 U.S.__, 32 S.Ct. 105, 106. Bullen v. Wisconsin (1916) 240 U.S. 625, 36 S.Ct. 473, 60 L.Ed. 830, upheld subjection, by Wisconsin, to an inheritance tax on the fund under a trust, the circumstances of creation (......
-
Appeal of Silberman
...* * * Counsel for the state cite and rely on Blackstone v. Miller, 188 U.S. 189 [23 S.Ct. 277, 47 L.Ed. 439], and Bullen v. Wisconsin, 240 U.S. 625 [36 S.Ct. 473, 60 L.Ed. 830]. Both cases related intangible personalty, which has been regarded as on a different footing from tangible persona......
-
Newton's Estate, In re
...jurisdiction to impose the tax. Mr. Justice Holmes stated his dissenting view that the result was irreconcilable with Bullen v. Wisconsin, 240 U.S. 625, 36 S.Ct. 473, 60 L.Ed. 830, where the general power was considered to have the same effect as In 1935, Stats. 1935, p. 1266, the legislatu......
-
Apt v. Birmingham, Civ. No. 424.
...Superior Oil Co. v. State of Mississippi, 1930, 280 U.S. 390, 395, 396, 50 S.Ct. 169, 74 L.Ed. 504; Bullen v. State of Wisconsin, 1916, 240 U.S. 625, 630, 36 S.Ct. 473, 60 L.Ed. 830; United States v. Isham, 1873, 17 Wall. 496, 84 U.S. 496, 506, 21 L.Ed. 728, Yiannias v. Commissioner, 8 Cir.......
-
Blodgett v. Guaranty Trust Co. of New York
...of acquiring property by inheritance." Keeney v. New York, supra, page 534 of 222 U.S.__, 32 S.Ct. 105, 106. Bullen v. Wisconsin (1916) 240 U.S. 625, 36 S.Ct. 473, 60 L.Ed. 830, upheld subjection, by Wisconsin, to an inheritance tax on the fund under a trust, the circumstances of creation (......
-
Appeal of Silberman
...* * * Counsel for the state cite and rely on Blackstone v. Miller, 188 U.S. 189 [23 S.Ct. 277, 47 L.Ed. 439], and Bullen v. Wisconsin, 240 U.S. 625 [36 S.Ct. 473, 60 L.Ed. 830]. Both cases related intangible personalty, which has been regarded as on a different footing from tangible persona......
-
Newton's Estate, In re
...jurisdiction to impose the tax. Mr. Justice Holmes stated his dissenting view that the result was irreconcilable with Bullen v. Wisconsin, 240 U.S. 625, 36 S.Ct. 473, 60 L.Ed. 830, where the general power was considered to have the same effect as In 1935, Stats. 1935, p. 1266, the legislatu......
-
The Economic Substance Doctrine: A U.S. Anti-Abuse Rule
...intended those tax benefits. Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 (1935), citing U.S. v. Isham, 17 Wall. 496, 506; Bullen v. Wisconsin, 240 U.S. 625, The legal right of a taxpayer to decrease the amount of what other taxes, or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be d......