Catlin v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Petitioners were the settlors and sole beneficiaries of a revocable trust. Two of the three were trustees of the trust and the third trustee was the husband of the third settlor-beneficiary. During 1922 and 1923 the trust estate sold certain stocks held by it at a loss. The larger part of such sales were made to the mother of the petitioners.
Read the full summary
Petitioners were the settlors and sole beneficiaries of a revocable trust. Two of the three were trustees of the trust and the third trustee was the husband of the third settlor-beneficiary. During 1922 and 1923 the trust estate sold certain stocks held by it at a loss. The larger part of such sales were made to the mother of the petitioners. Held, that such sales were not of trust property within the meaning of the Revenue Act of 1921, and that petitioners are entitled to deduct from their personal incomes, pro rata, losses sustained on such sales. Held, further, that the sales to…
1Opinion of the Court
*838OPINION.
MaRQuette:
The first question here presented is whether under the trust agreement of October 31, 1916, the beneficiaries of the Catlin Estate may, as individuals, deduct losses sustained by the sale of capital' assets of the estate.
It is clear, we think, that the trust in question was revocable. The respondent so treats it, and the facts sustain that view. While the trust agreement did not contain an express power of revocation, in Tiaee verba, it did permit any or all of the beneficiaries to alienate his or her interest in the trust assets at any time. The settlors of the trust were…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Catlin v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1932