Rowell's Estate

20 Pa. D. & C. 42, 1933 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 55
CourtPennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County
DecidedNovember 10, 1933
DocketNo. 611 of 1932
StatusPublished

This text of 20 Pa. D. & C. 42 (Rowell's Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rowell's Estate, 20 Pa. D. & C. 42, 1933 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 55 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1933).

Opinion

The facts appear from the opinion of

Van Dusen, J., hearing judge.

Testator died May 2, 1931, and by his will gave an annuity of $12,000 to his widow and the rest to collateral heirs and charities. Testator’s widow died October 4,1931. The register of wills assessed inheritance tax against the widow’s annuity, valuing the same at $5,066.67, the amount actually received by her, and not on the basis of her expectancy of life according to the mortality tables. The register then assessed inheritance tax against the remainder interests, valuing the same as of the date of the widow’s death, without deducting anything for the value of the widow’s annuity. The total tax assessed is $43,663.58.

The will directs that all inheritance taxes be paid by the residuary estate The executors made payment on account of inheritance tax, on August 1,1931 specified to be as follows:

[43]*43Direct tax at 2% on $72,000............................ $1,440.00
Collateral tax at 10% on $212,000....................... 21,200.00
$22,640.00
Less 5% discount................................. 1,132.00
$21,508.00

On April 29,1932, they paid $17,517,38, a total of $39,025.38.

The executors, who are also trustees of the residuary estate, claim that the tax on the widow’s annuity should have been assessed according to her expectancy of life, and that the tax on the remainder interests should be assessed upon the value of principal after deducting such assessed value of the widow’s annuity.

In my opinion, the register of wills, in assessing the inheritance tax on an annuity or life interest, should value the same with the aid of mortality tables in every case. The tax should therefore be paid on the expectancy of life and not on actual experience. It would lead to great inequalities if the tax were assessed on actual experience in the few cases where the life estate ended before the tax was assessed, and expectancy was used in all other cases. See Ithaca Trust Company, Executor and Trustee, v. United States, 279 U. S. 151.

The right of the remaindermen also to pay their tax before they come into possession, in order to secure equal treatment in all estates, must be based not on actual experience, but on the value of the remainder interest at the time the remaindermen elect to pay, less the theoretical value of the annuity or life estate at that time. If the remaindermen elect to pay their tax at once after the death of the testator, the deduction is the assessed value of the life estate. If the remaindermen elect to pay after 5 years, let us say, while the annuitant is still living, the deduction which they get is based upon the expectancy of life of the annuitant or life tenant as of that date, and according to age at that date. The valuation of the life estate will, at that time, necessarily be less than it was before, but it will always be something.

We should bear in mind that although the will directs that all tax be paid out of the residuary estate, the remaindermen are not entitled to have the payment of their tax made in advance out of the estate because the income of the life tenant is diminished thereby: Constable’s Estate, 299 Pa. 509. If remaindermen wish to pay the tax in advance, they must do so with their own money.

This system will produce some apparent inequalities in practice. If the life tenant dies before his expectation has run out, the Commonwealth will be in a sense overpaid; and if the life tenant outlives his expectation the Commonwealth will be underpaid, and the case will happen that the life tenancy will not last long enough to earn the money to pay the tax. This result is inseparable from our method of taxing life estates separately.

The remainderman ought to have a reasonable time after the death of the testator in which to learn what the assets and liabilities are and to make up his mind whether he will engage in the speculation upon the death of the life tenant which the law permits to him.

Executors’ accounts are filed after 6 months, and normally they are audited and distribution is ordered within 1 year. Interest on unpaid inheritance tax, which is due, begins to run 1 year after the testator’s death: section 38 of the Act of June 20, 1919, P. L. 521. By section 15 of the Act, as amended by the Act of July 12, 1923, P. L. 1078, the register is authorized to enforce the payment of tax which “shall remain due and unpaid for one year after decedent’s death”. By article I, section 3, the remainderman must give security to pay the tax [44]*44within 1 year, otherwise the tax becomes payable immediately, even though he~ is not in possession. This latter provision is not enforceable when the remainderman is not ascertained: Coxe’s Estate, 193 Pa. 100; and it is not always enforced. Federal estate tax is payable at the end of a year; the widow must, elect within a year; and interest on legacies begins to run after a year.

William M. Boenning, for exceptant; John Harper, contra. November 10, 1933.

These provisions of law form a surprisingly consistent system; and while-not all of them are directly applicable to the present situation, I conclude from, them all that the remainderman has at least a year in which to decide whether-he will pay “immediately” or wait until he comes into possession. Whether he might have a longer time if the estate was unsettled, it is not necessary now to • decide. If, therefore, the remainderman pays within a year (as he did here), he has a right to deduct from the principal of the estate the theoretical value-of the annuity or life estate as of the testator’s death.

While the Commonwealth has not appealed, the appeal throws the whole-assessment open for correction of any error.

Evidence was offered that the executors by conversation among themselves elected to pay within the year, but I have not paid any regard to that testimony.. It is what they did that counts.

The appeal from the register is sustained, and the tax is assessed as follows::

Value of estate as determined by the register’s appraisement, exclusive of specific bequests and devises........$455,183.38
Less theoretical value of widow’s annuity as agreed...... 72,276.00
Amount taxable at 10%..............................$382,907.38
Tax at 10%................ $38,290.74
Specific bequests and devises to the widow.............. $21,056.00
Widow’s annuity.................................... 72,276.00
Amount taxable at 2%................................ $93,332.00
Tax at 2%.......................................... $1,866.64

Henderson, J.,

These exceptions were filed to the-adjudication of the hearing judge upon an appeal from an appraisement for-transfer inheritance tax purposes.

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

Related

Ithaca Trust Co. v. United States
279 U.S. 151 (Supreme Court, 1929)
Clabby's Estate
162 A. 207 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1932)
Constable's Estate
149 A. 743 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1930)
Estate of Coxe
44 A. 256 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 Pa. D. & C. 42, 1933 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowells-estate-paorphctphilad-1933.