Van Zandt v. Commissioner

40 T.C. 824, 1963 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 74
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedAugust 8, 1963
DocketDocket No. 92670
StatusPublished
Cited by35 cases

This text of 40 T.C. 824 (Van Zandt 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
Van Zandt v. Commissioner, 40 T.C. 824, 1963 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 74 (tax 1963).

Opinion

OPINION

Dawson, Judge:

Respondent determined deficiencies in the income tax of petitioners for the years 1958 and 1959 in the respective amounts of $1,698.57 and $2,679.95. The only issue presented is whether payments made during 1958 and 1959 by petitioner, I. L. Van Zandt, to two trusts as rental for a building and certain medical equipment, which he had previously transferred to the trusts and leased back for his use in the practice of medicine, are deductible as ordinary and necessary business expenses under the provisions of section 162(a) (3).1

All of the facts have been stipulated by the parties. The stipulation of facts and exhibits attached thereto are incorporated herein by reference.

I. L. Van Zandt and Euth B. Van Zandt (hereinafter called petitioners) are husband and wife residing in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Tex. Throughout the calendar years 1958 and 1959, and prior and subsequent thereto, I. L. Van Zandt (hereinafter sometimes referred to as petitioner), was engaged in the practice of medicine, specializing in surgery, at 905 and 915 Fifth Avenue in Fort Worth.

Petitioner’s professional books and records are kept on a calendar year and cash basis. He and his wife filed their joint income tax returns on the same basis for 1958 and 1959 with the district director of internal revenue at Dallas, Tex.

In the practice of his profession the petitioner, among other facilities, uses offices, a reception room, a laboratory, X-ray and other equipment.

On April 29, 1957, the petitioners signed a single instrument creating two separate and distinct trusts. One, styled the Neil Van Zandt Trust, was for the benefit of their son, Neil Van Zandt, and the other, styled the Eugenia Van Zandt Trust, was for the benefit of their daughter, Eugenia Van Zandt. The trust instrument provides as follows:

That we, I. L. VAN ZANDT and wife, RUTH BODDEKER VAN ZANDT, of the state and county aforesaid (who, in their capacity as grantors, will sometimes hereinafter be styled “trustors”) for the purpose of establishing the trusts hereinafter set up, and in consideration of the love and affection which we, and each of us, bear for our children, the beneficiaries of said trusts, have transferred, assigned and paid over and do hereby transfer, assign and pay over unto I. L. Van Zandt in his capacity as the original trustee of the trusts herein set up the sum of $200.00 in cash which shall constitute the aggregate original corpora of the two trusts herein created. And the said I. L. Van Zandt, as such trustee, hereby acknowledges the receipt of said sum and hereby declares that he shall, and that his successor or successors will, hold said sum and all revenues, additions and changes in the corpora of the two trusts herein created in trust for the use and purposes and upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth and for the benefit of those hereinafter specified. That is to say:
ARTICLE ONE
The trustors intend to and do create hereby two separate and distinct trusts. One of these trusts is for the use and benefit of their son, Neil Van Zandt, born June 10, 1945. This trust shall be known as the Neil Van Zandt Trust. The other trust is for the use and benefit of their daughter, Eugenia Van Zandt, born August 10, 1946. This trust shall be known as the Eugenia Van Zandt Trust. One-half of the sum of $200.00 so paid by grantors to the trustee as hereinabove provided shall constitute the original corpus of each of said trusts. The separate identity of each of said trusts shall always be maintained by the trustee in the trustee’s books, records and accounting and in all other ways and for all other purposes.
ARTICLE TWO
Each trust hereby created shall continue until June 30, 1967, save and except that the prior death of its beneficiary shall terminate the trust. If a trust created hereby is terminated by the death of its beneficiary, any undistributed income of the trust then on hand shall be disposed of as provided in the deceased beneficiary’s Will should such beneficiary leave a valid Will failing which such undistributed income shall pass to and vest in those persons entitled to the same under the laws of descent and distribution of the State of Texas then in force and effect. Unless sooner terminated by the death of its beneficiary, each trust created hereby shall, as hereinabove set out, terminate June 30, 1967. Any and all undistributed income of the trust then on hand shall be distributed to the beneficiary of the trust, and the trust corpus shall pass to and revest in grantors.
ARTICLE THREE
During the minority of the beneficiary of a trust created hereby the income of that trust shall be accumulated by the trustee for the benefit of such beneficiary except that if during such period of minority neither of the trustors is financially able to provide for the care, support, maintenance and education of such beneficiary, so much of the income of that beneficiary’s trust as the trustee deems appropriate may be expended to provide such care, maintenance, education and support. After the beneficiary of a trust created hereby reaches the age of twenty-one, there shall be distributed to such beneficiary periodically and as often as once each year all of the net income of that beneficiary’s trust received after such beneficiary reaches the age of twenty-one years. Should the trustee determine such action to be for the best interest of the beneficiary, after the beneficiary attains the age of twenty-one years, there may be distributed to the beneficiary for the furtherance of his or her education, for the purpose of applying on the purchase of a home should the beneficiary be then married, and for such other purposes as, in the sole discretion of the trustee, may appear to be for the best interest of the beneficiary, part or all of the income of the trust that accumulated during the minority of the beneficiary.
ARTICLE FOUR
Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, each trust created hereby shall be governed, controlled and administered under and in accordance with the terms of the Texas Trust Act as it may exist as of the time any determination is made or required to be made under this instrument. For so long as the original trustee, I. L. Van Zandt, is the trustee of the trusts created hereby, there shall be no restriction as to the character of investments which he may make of trust funds or of the business activities in which he may engage on behalf of the said trusts or either of them, save and except that no funds of the trusts, or either of them, may be loaned to trustors or either of them without adequate security or at less than the rate of interest then currently being charged on commercial loans by representative banks, members of the Fort Worth Clearing House Association, nor may the trustee purchase trust assets or, himself, lease or otherwise occupy trust property for less than the fair market value of such assets or right of occupancy.

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

Related

Sundrup v. Comm'r
2010 T.C. Memo. 249 (U.S. Tax Court, 2010)
Kimm v. Comm'r
2003 T.C. Memo. 215 (U.S. Tax Court, 2003)
Chin v. Comm'r
2003 T.C. Memo. 30 (U.S. Tax Court, 2003)
AWADALLAH v. COMMISSIONER
2001 T.C. Summary Opinion 93 (U.S. Tax Court, 2001)
BITTNER v. COMMISSIONER
2001 T.C. Summary Opinion 22 (U.S. Tax Court, 2001)
Rosenfeld v. Commissioner
1982 T.C. Memo. 263 (U.S. Tax Court, 1982)
Peck v. Commissioner
1982 T.C. Memo. 17 (U.S. Tax Court, 1982)
May v. Commissioner
76 T.C. 7 (U.S. Tax Court, 1981)
Goodman v. Commissioner
74 T.C. 684 (U.S. Tax Court, 1980)
Lerner v. Commissioner
71 T.C. 290 (U.S. Tax Court, 1978)
Serbousek v. Commissioner
1977 T.C. Memo. 105 (U.S. Tax Court, 1977)
Butler v. Commissioner
65 T.C. 327 (U.S. Tax Court, 1975)
Mathews v. Commissioner
61 T.C. No. 3 (U.S. Tax Court, 1973)
Zumstein v. Commissioner
1973 T.C. Memo. 45 (U.S. Tax Court, 1973)
Wiles v. Commissioner
59 T.C. 289 (U.S. Tax Court, 1972)
Duffy v. United States
343 F. Supp. 4 (S.D. Ohio, 1972)
Penn v. Comm'r
51 T.C. 144 (U.S. Tax Court, 1968)
Furman v. Commissioner
45 T.C. 360 (U.S. Tax Court, 1966)
Chase v. Commissioner
1965 T.C. Memo. 202 (U.S. Tax Court, 1965)
Oakes v. Comm'r
44 T.C. 524 (U.S. Tax Court, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
40 T.C. 824, 1963 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 74, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-zandt-v-commissioner-tax-1963.