Indiana Department of Revenue, Inheritance Tax Division v. Security Bank & Trust Co.
This text of 393 N.E.2d 197 (Indiana Department of Revenue, Inheritance Tax Division v. Security Bank & Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The Indiana Department of Revenue, Inheritance Tax Division (Department) appeals an adverse decision in a rehearing concerning a deduction taken by the estate of Lawrence D. O’Donnell, Jr., (Estate) in its computation of the inheritance tax due.
We reverse.
The facts are not in dispute. On November 19, 1974, Lawrence D. O’Donnell, Jr., died. In the determination of the inheritance tax liability, his executor filed a schedule of all assets which listed a mortgage lien on certain real property as a deduction. This property had been held by the decedent and his surviving spouse by tenancy by entirety. On September 26, 1975, an Order Determining Value of the Estate and Amount of Tax was issued by the trial court. Department petitioned the court for a rehearing of the proper inclusion of this deduction. The rehearing was eventually held and an order given' denying the relief petition for by the Department. This appeal followed.
The Department basically relies on Ind. Code 6-4-1 — 4(a)(6) and its administrative regulation, Ind.Admin.Rules & Regs. (6-4-1 — 4)-2 (Burns Code Ed.), as its argument.1 The statute provides in relevant part:
In determining the value of property transferred by will or intestate laws in a resident decedents’ estate, the following deductions and no others shall be allowed from the fair market value of the property to which the transfer relates:
(1) Debts of the transferor which constitute lawful claims against his resident estate .
(6) Mortgages and special assessments which at the time of [the] death of the transferor were a lien on [the] real property located within this state and taxable under this act shall be deducted only from the value of such property.
The rule provides:
Liens, taxes or unpaid indebtedness on certain real estate and personal property not allowable. — Taxes, mortgages and any other liens or unpaid indebtedness on real estate held by the decedent and spouse by the entireties, which real estate is not subject to inheritance tax, are not allowable deductions, nor is any lien, tax or unpaid indebtedness on real estate or tangible personal property, owned by the decedent and located outside the state of Indiana, an allowable deduction. [Emphasis added].
There is no argument by the Estate that the regulation was not properly promulgated, and we note that the Department had the authority to do so under IC 6-8-3-S and IC 6-4-1-312.
The rule is well-established in Indiana as to the effect of duly promulgated rules of administrative agencies:
It has been held that where administrative bodies have been created by the Legislature, the rules they make must be reasonable and reasonably adapted to carry out the purpose or object for which these administrative boards were created. If they are in conflict with the state’s organic law, or antagonistic to the general law of the state, or “opposed to the fundamental principles of justice, or inconsistent with the powers conferred upon such boards,” they are invalid. [Citations omitted].
Mobley v. City of Evansville (1960), 130 Ind.App. 575, 167 N.E.2d 473; Morris v. City of Evansville (1972), 152 Ind.App. 50, 281 N.E.2d 910.
The Estate’s argument is essentially an “end-run” around IC 6-4-l-4(a)(6). They begin by noting that a mortgage transac[199]*199tion consists of two elements: the debt as evidenced by a note and the security agreement. The estate maintains (although their description in the schedule of deductions does not indicate it) that they are deducting the debt under IC 6-4-1 — 4(a)(1), not the mortgage lien under (6).- In the Estate’s viewpoint, (6) is only for real property owned by the decedent with a mortgage attached, but where the decedent is not personally liable for the debt. To the Estate, (1) should handle all other situations where there is mortgaged property.
The regulation quoted above takes the view that if the real property is not included in the estate then “taxes, mortgages and any other liens or unpaid indebtedness” relating to the property should not be taken as deduction on the property. The statute clearly states that taxes and mortgages can be deducted only if the real property to which they relate are in the estate. The regulation, however, adds indebtedness to this list in its interpretation of the statute.
We see the regulation as a reasonable interpretation of the statute. If the existing mortgage lien cannot be deducted if the property is not included in the estate, then the underlying debt cannot be deducted either. To rule otherwise would make a nullity of IC 6-4-l — 4(a)(6) which limits a deduction on encumbered property to that of property included in the estate.3
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
393 N.E.2d 197, 181 Ind. App. 543, 1979 Ind. App. LEXIS 1276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/indiana-department-of-revenue-inheritance-tax-division-v-security-bank-indctapp-1979.