Drazen v. Commissioner

48 T.C. 1, 1967 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 123
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedApril 6, 1967
DocketDocket No. 5505-64
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 48 T.C. 1 (Drazen v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Drazen v. Commissioner, 48 T.C. 1, 1967 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 123 (tax 1967).

Opinion

Arundell, Judge:

Respondent determined a deficiency in estate tax of $27,261.52.

The only remaining issue for decision is whether the respondent erred in including in decedent’s gross estate under section 2040, I.R.C.. 1954, jointly owned property in the total amount of $32,262.34. Several other issues were assigned but were either settled by stipulation or abandoned. Effect will be given to this stipulation in a recomputation to be made under Rule 50.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The stipulated facts are incorporated herein by reference.

Robert T. Drazen, hereinafter referred to as decedent, died testate at the age of 49 on January 11,1960, at which time he was a resident of New TIaven, Conn.

Under the provisions of decedent’s last will and testament, his wife Vera H. Drazen, hereinafter sometimes referred to as Yera, was designated executrix, and said executrix qualified and was duly appointed as such by letters testamentary granted on March 10, 1960, by the Surrogate’s Court, New Haven, Conn.

The estate tax return for the estate of the decedent was filed by the executrix with the district director of internal revenue, Hartford, Conn., on October 11, 1961.

In Schedule E of the estate tax return the executrix reported as “Jointly Owned Property” of decedent and Yera, cash on deposit in four joint bank accounts at the time of decedent’s death, payable to either or the survivor, amounts as follows:

The Tradesmens National Bant of New Haven_$16, 835. 72
Federation Bank & Trust Company (New York)- 697.25
First Federal Savings & Loan Association of New Haven- 175.12
The New Haven Savings Bank (New Haven)- 14,554.25
Total_ 32, 262. 34

Immediately after this total amount on Schedule E appeared these two sentences: “Only one half was property of decedent. Yera H. Drazen worked in Pure Oil [sic] Refiners — so one half of above represents her earnings over the years.”

The executrix included in decedent’s gross estate only one-half of the total amount of $32,262.34. The respondent in his determination included the entire amount and in a statement attached to the deficiency notice explained his determination, as follows:

Return Determined
(b) Jointly owned property items 1-4 in-clusive_$16,131.17 $32,262.34
Addition to gross estate_ 16,131.17
The adjustment reflects the inclusion under Section 2040 of the Internal Revenue Code of all jointly owned property.

The decedent was a full-time executive and stockholder of Drazen Lumber Co. in New Haven, Conn., except for some indefinite time devoted to Oilpure Refiner Co., hereinafter mentioned. For the years 1957, 1958, and 1959 his annual salary from Drazen Lumber Co. amounted to $23,000, $13,000, and $20,000, respectively, and in prior years his salary approximated the same amounts. He deposited his salary in the joint checking account at the Tradesmens National Bank of New Haven, hereinafter referred to as Tradesmens. This account was used by the decedent and Yera for household purposes. Yera also had a separate checking account at Tradesmens. It was a small account which she used for convenience. Yera also had a separate savings account with the Connecticut Savings Bank of New Haven, hereinafter called Connecticut Savings. At the time of decedent’s death, Yera’s ’balance in Connecticut Savings was $1,579.24.

About 1950 or 1951 the decedent and Yera obtained a franchise to sell, both at retail and wholesale, in the States of New Jersey and New York some kind of an oil refiner used in automobiles, trucks, and stationary equipment. The initial investment in this business was between $5,000 and $10,000. It was taken from the joint Tradesmens account. The business was conducted as a sole proprietorship in the husband’s name as Oilpure Refiner Co. of New York, hereinafter referred to as Oilpure. The decedent consulted Yera before going into the business. It meant that the decedent and Yera would have to give up their evenings, Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays to work at the business. They employed salesmen who traveled and solicited orders. They kept a telephone in an office in New York with an answering service to record orders. Oilpure carried approximately $10,000 worth of inventory in a warehouse in New York. In addition to.his full-time employment with the Drazen Lumber Co., the decedent helped the salesmen of Oilpure, held sales meetings, discussed different ways of selling the product, went to see the distributors with the salesmen, took care of any trouble that arose, and signed all the checks. Vera operated mainly from their residence, where she did all the office work, such as bookkeeping, billing, ordering, looking after the inventory, and payment of bills by preparing checks for her husband to sign. Either she or her husband, or both, would go to the New York office several times a week to take care of the business there.

Oilpure had a checking account with the Chase Manhattan Bank of New York, which was in the name of “Oilpure Refiner Co., of N.Y. c/o Kobert T. Drazen.” At the date of decedent’s death, the balance in this account was $24,529.04.

The net worth of Oilpure at the date of decedent’s death was $50,-558.91, determined as follows:

Cash_$24,529.04
Accounts receivable_ 4, 971. 68
Inventories_ 17, 893. 88
Buildings and other fixed assets_ 5, 997.98
Accumulated depreciation_ (2,424.56)
Total_ 50,968.02
Less accrued taxes_ 409.11
Net worth_ 50, 558. 91

The cash, accounts receivable, and inventories were all reported in decedent’s estate tax return under Schedule E as “Other Miscellaneous Property.”

Neither the decedent nor Yera drew any salary from Oilpure.

The money collected from the business of Oilpure was used to pay debts of Oilpure, several trips taken by the decedent and Vera, and the personal expenses of the decedent and Yera.

The net profit (or loss) from the operation of Oilpure was reported in the joint individual income tax returns of the decedent and Vera. These operations for the years 1957, 1958, 1959, and 11 days in 1960 were as follows:

Net profit Year Gross profit Deductions (or loss)
1957_ $29, 488. 07 $30,114. 36 ($626. 29)
1958_ 24, 633. 50 25,210. 60 (577. 10)
1959_ 20, 345. 79 17, 516. 70 2, 829. 09
1960_ 222. 17 577. 10 (354.93)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Estate of Ensley v. Commissioner
1977 T.C. Memo. 402 (U.S. Tax Court, 1977)
Drazen v. Commissioner
48 T.C. 1 (U.S. Tax Court, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 T.C. 1, 1967 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drazen-v-commissioner-tax-1967.