Commissioner v. Estate of Levine
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
526 F.2d 717 (1975)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
David Levine created trusts for his grandchildren. While the trust beneficiaries were minors, the trustees could choose whether to distribute a trust’s income to the beneficiary or to accumulate the trust’s income and pay all accumulated income to the beneficiary at age 21. After age 21, the beneficiary was entitled to receive annual income payments for life. The commissioner of Internal Revenue (commissioner) (defendant) determined that the beneficiaries’ rights to receive income after they turned 21 were future interests and, therefore, that the post-21 income parts of Levine’s gifts did not qualify for the annual gift-tax exclusion. Levine’s estate (plaintiff) petitioned the United States Tax Court for a determination that, under 26 U.S.C. § 2503(c), the beneficiaries’ rights to receive income after they turned 21 were deductible, present interests because (1) it was undisputed that the beneficiaries had present interests in receiving income before age 21 and (2) the post-21 income interests were merely continuations of the existing present interests. The Tax Court ruled that the beneficiaries’ post-21 income interests were continuations of present interests and, therefore, were deductible, present interests. The commissioner appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kaufman, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
