Estate of Weil v. Commissioner
This text of 1954 T.C. Memo. 96 (Estate of Weil 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.
Opinion
Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion
TIETJENS, Judge: The Commissioner determined a deficiency of $6,252.05 in income tax for the year 1949.
The question is whether expenses incurred in connection with the adjudication*152 of incompetency and the appointment of a Committee of the person and estate of the taxpayer are deductible under
All of the facts have been stipulated, are so found and the stipulation and the exhibits attached thereto are incorporated by reference.
The taxes in controversy are those of Elsie Weil. She was adjudicated incompetent to manage herself and her affairs and Helen W. Benjamin was appointed the Committee of her person and estate by order of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, entered December 7, 1949, with the usual powers incident thereto.
The property of Elsie Weil received for administration by Helen W. Benjamin as Committee consisted of*153 the following:
Stocks of the fair market value on December 7, 1949 of $511,081.73, the dividends from which, in the sum of $31,204.32, were reported and taxed for Federal income tax purposes for the calendar year 1949.
Bonds of the fair market value on December 7, 1949 of $109,356.57, the interest from which, in the sum of $4,966.32, was reported and taxed for Federal income tax purposes for the calendar year 1949.
Tax exempt bonds of the fair market value on December 7, 1949 of $13,000.00, with tax free interest of $335.00 per year.
Cash on deposit with Banks and Trust Companies in the amount of $18,193.66.
Helen W. Benjamin, as Committee, was required to file, and did file, with the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of New York a bond in the penalty of $730,000 conditioned that she would faithfully discharge the trust imposed upon her.
The following expenses were incurred in the incompetency proceeding, were ordered paid by the Court and were paid in the year 1949:
To Spence, Hotchkiss, Parker & Duryee, Esqs., the petitioner's counsel, the sum of $10,089.01 for services rendered and disbursements incurred on behalf of the petitioner in the conduct of the proceeding.
*154 To Dr. Samuel C. Burchell, the sum of $250.00 for necessary services rendered as a witness in the proceeding.
To Dr. Lawrence S. Kubie, the sum of $250.00 for necessary services rendered as a witness in the proceeding.
To Edward V. Loughlin, Esq., the sum of $2,500.00 as his allowance as the Commissioner in the proceeding.
The expenses totaling $13,089.01 were taken by Elsie Weil in her 1949 income tax return as a deduction from income under
The income tax returns of Elsie Weil before and during her incompetency were always made on a cash basis and on a calendar year basis.
Elsie Weil died March 27, 1952. Robert M. Benjamin and Franklin E. Parker, Jr. qualified in the Surrogate's Court of the County of New York on April 18, 1952, as the executors named in the last will and testament of Elsie Weil, deceased, and have at all times thereafter continued to act as such executors.
The above expenses were disallowed by the Commissioner with the explanation that they were not allowable under
We think*155 the claimed deduction was allowable on the authority of
Elsie was possessed of a substantial estate, consisting entirely of income producing securities. Though there was no direct evidence to that effect we think it obvious that her properties were held for the production of income, and no argument is made to the contrary. We also think it is obvious that the very purpose of the proceeding for the appointment of the Committee was the proper management and conservation of the income producing property which Elsie owned and to insure that valid actions could be taken to that end rather than run the risk of having actions taken by the taxpayer later attacked on the ground of incompetency. With the exception noted below, we hold*156 the deduction was properly claimed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1954 T.C. Memo. 96, 13 T.C.M. 653, 1954 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/estate-of-weil-v-commissioner-tax-1954.