Hill v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
The will of a decedent provided that the executors, in their absolute discretion, could require or waive refunding bonds before paying income to the residuary legatees. Held, such provision prevents the right of the legatees to current income from being vested and absolute, and such income, to the extent not actually distributed or irrevocably credited to them is not includible in their taxable incomes. Sec. 162 (b), I. R. C. 1939.
1ConcurrenceBruce, J.
I concur in the result reached by the majority but think that under the facts in the instant case it is unnecessary to decide whether income is to be distributed currently within the purview of section 162 (b) where the executor can require the dis-tributee to furnish a refunding bond. A decision on this ground is somewhat broad as a refunding bond could apparently have been required by the executors under the law in Tennessee (Williams, Code of Tennessee (1934), sec. 8336), and no doubt could be required in a large number of other States having similar statutes, even if there had been no…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Phalen v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Globe Indemnity Co. v. BruceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935
- Nashville Trust Co. v. Com'r of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
- Hutchison v. MontgomeryTennessee Supreme Court · 1938
- Union Planters Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. BeelerTennessee Supreme Court · 1938
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.