Estate of Hamelsky v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Decedent's will provided that his executor could distribute assets in kind at their values as finally determined for Federal estate tax purposes in satisfaction of the marital bequest. Held, in accordance with Rev. Proc. 64-19, sec. 2.02, the marital deduction does not fail under the terminable interest provisions of sec. 2056(b)(1), I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Quealy, Judge:
In this proceeding the Commissioner has determined a deficiency in the estate tax of the petitioner in the amount of $131,010.34. The petitioner contests that determination. Concessions having been made by the parties, the sole question for decision is whether a bequest to his wife by Abraham Hamelsky, the decedent, qualifies for the martial deduction under section 2056.1 The matter was submitted upon a stipulation of facts pursuant to Rule 30 of the Tax Court Rules of Practice.
The stipulation of facts and exhibits attached thereto are incorporated herein by this…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commissioner v. Estate of BoschSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Russell v. Princeton Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1967
- Peoples Trust Company of Bergen County, of the Estate of Dora Plume, Deceased v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate of Herman J. Bosch, Deceased, Irving Trust Company, Executor,respondentCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966
- Bosch v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1964
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Blair v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1974
- Pastan v. PastanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
- Hurst v. First Kentucky Trust Co.Kentucky Supreme Court · 1978
- Blair v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1974
- Estate of Hamelsky v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.