The bixby liquidating trust Dating community local sex online free members

Notwithstanding the exhaustive but erroneous treatment of the local law upon which the Tax Court places the full weight of their final decision, I am told I cannot discuss the problem because the government did not argue the specific problem in their brief, but confined their attention to the applicability of § 167 (26 U. Even then, the question of whether the test of divested ownership or power to control income under § 167 would arise.Here the petitioners,2 as stockholders, controlled the two corporations involved.Otherwise, a manifest injustice might be accomplished.Executed long before the events here in controversy, the instrument in question was drawn with great care and meticulousness. III of the trust instrument vest at death such an interest in the corpus as heirs generally take under California law. IV fixes the termination of the trust upon the death of the last survivor of 21 named individuals. Corpus could not pass at death to the heirs-at-law generally as the Supreme Court of California in the Bixby case said would be necessary to give trustors such rights of control as would make them in effect owners of the corpus. "Nor could the trustors under the power of appointment reserved to them in Art. Should an attempt be made under the power of appointment to appoint corpus to heirs generally at death, the possession and control thereof would be held in abeyance until the death of the last survivor of the 21 named individuals.As a practical matter, notwithstanding expressions in the document, the majority stockholders, as grantors, retained complete control over the corporations and distribution therefrom as well as their own actions as "trustees." As a practical matter, notwithstanding the use of the word "irrevocable" in the document, the grantors retained complete power to dissolve the agreement by mutual consent of the eight, without more, and notwithstanding the clauses by which the beneficial interest would devolve upon certain persons or the "heirs" during life or lives in being, the beneficiaries had no interest according to the express words of the document, but the legal and equitable title was vested in the "trustees," who were the same identical persons who were grantors, and therefore were under absolute control of the grantors.If the government is to be deprived of taxes by an instrument so drawn, it would seem the Court was at least entitled to examine its terms even if the agents of the government failed to argue the points which seem so clear upon a reading of the document.

The opinion of the Tax Court, as originally promulgated, is reported at 12 T. The order denying that motion was accompanied by a memorandum which appears in the margin.1 "1. In the event the spouse predeceased the trustor, the trust income was given to a particular class of persons, the issue.The draftsman drives forward on a broad smooth path to the objective of absolute control of the property by the eight members of this family group.It is signed by the eight as individuals who transfer the stock, as transferors, and again by the same eight individuals as a group as transferees holding the stock in joint tenancy. It was only after the natural objects of the trustor's bounty ceased to exist that the California law of succession was to take its course. IX expressly prohibits the trustors from doing anything, directly or indirectly, that would terminate the trust prior to the expiration of the fixed term thereof, to vest the unrestricted ownership, use, possession and control of trust corpus in themselves or in their appointees, at or prior to the expiration of the fixed term of the trust. Without considering whether in confining his argument before us to the two questions just quoted, the Commissioner would be deemed to have abandoned some of the points argued by him before the Tax Court, Cf. Los Angeles Brewing Co., 9 Cir., 183 F.2d 398; Western National Ins. Similarly the trustor provided that upon termination of the trust the trust corpus was vested in and distributable to a particular class, namely, his or her then living issue, per stirpes; and if none survived, trust corpus was to go, upon termination of the trust, to the living heirs-at-law, the identity and respective shares to be determined by California law in force at the time of the trustor's death.

Leave a Reply