Cochran v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
A transfer in trust where the grantor reserved the income for life and the right to distributions of principal for her "care and comfort" or for any unforseen emergency, held a transfer to take effect in possession or enjoyment at or after death within the meaning of section 811 (c), Internal Revenue Code.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
LeMire, Judge:
Our sole question here is whether the value of the trust corpus is includible in the decedent’s gross estate under section 811 (c), Internal Eevenue Code, as a transfer intended to take effect in possession or enjoyment at or after death. Since the trust was created prior to the joint resolution of Congress of March 3, 1931, it was not affected by the reservation of the life estate in the grantor, and the respondent so concedes. May v. Heiner, 281 U. S. 238; Hassett v. Welch, 303 U. S. 303. The respondent further concedes that the transfer in trust was not made in…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Helvering v. HallockSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Hassett v. WelchSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- May v. HeinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Fidelity-Philadelphia Trust Co. v. RothensiesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Commissioner v. Estate of FieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Moreno v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1957
- Cochran's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1949
- West v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Estate of Valentine v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- Cochran v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.