ESTATE OF SCHNACK v. COMMISSIONER
United States Tax Court
Life insurance policies were purchased on decedent wife's life, with premiums being paid with funds withdrawn from husband and wife's joint checking account. Held, agency relationship existed so that payment of insurance premiums by one joint tenant, wife, constituted payment by the non-withdrawing tenant, husband.
Read the full summary
Life insurance policies were purchased on decedent wife's life, with premiums being paid with funds withdrawn from husband and wife's joint checking account. Held, agency relationship existed so that payment of insurance premiums by one joint tenant, wife, constituted payment by the non-withdrawing tenant, husband. Therefore, decedent wife did not have a transferable interest in the policies within the purview of sec. 2035. Estate of Clay v. Commissioner,86 T.C. 1266 (1986), followed.
1Opinion of the Court
ESTATE OF JOAN SCHNACK, DECEASED, WILLIAM D. SCHNACK, EXECUTOR, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ESTATE OF SCHNACK v. COMMISSIONER
Docket No. 35519-83
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1986-570; 1986 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 35; 52 T.C.M. (CCH) 1107; T.C.M. (RIA) 86570;
December 1, 1986; REVERSED AND REMANDED May 25, 1988
Life insurance policies were purchased on decedent wife's life, with premiums being paid with funds withdrawn from husband and wife's joint checking account. Held, agency relationship existed so that payment of insurance premiums by one joint tenant, wife,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Aquilino v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- United States v. Estate of GraceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Tyre v. Aetna Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- In Re Marriage of MarsdenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Paterson v. ComastriCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.