Hugo Black

Name: Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (335 U.S. 632) — Opinion of the Court
Author: Hugo Black

Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

Summary

“Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (335 U.S. 632) — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Hugo Black. It explores elements such as Hallock, Heiner and trust.

Quotes from Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue… (Hugo Black)

Hugo Black, Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ As early as 1884 the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that where a legal transfer of property was made which carried with it a right of possession with a reservation by the grantor of income and profits from the property for his life, the transfer was not intended to take effect in enjoyment until the grantor's death: 'One certainly cannot be considered, as in the actual enjoyment of an estate, who has no right to the profits or incomes arising or accruing therefrom.' Reish, Adm'r v. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Hugo Black, Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ Heiner, passage of the mere technical legal title to a trustee is not necessarily crucial in determining whether and when a gift becomes 'complete' for estate tax purposes. Looking to substance and not merely to form, as we must unless we depart from the teaching of Hallock, the inescapable fact is that Church retained for himself until death a most valuable property right in these stocks-the right to get and to spend their income. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Hugo Black, Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ The basic 'settled principle' now as when Hallock was written is that where a trust agreement reserves the settlor's possession or enjoyment of part or all of the trust property until death, the value of the trust should be included in the settlor's gross estate. The arguments in dissent here based on stare decisis, legislative history, and possible consequences of this Court's holding, are strikingly like the forceful arguments made in the Hallock dissent. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Hugo Black, Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ In fact, the purpose of this settlor as expressed in his trust papers was to make 'provision for any lawful issue' he might 'leave at the time of his death as well as provide an income for himself for life.' This paper, labeled a trust, but providing for all the substantial purposes of a will, was intended to and did postpone until the settlor's death the right of his relatives to possess and enjoy his property. There may be trust instruments that fall more clearly within the class intended to be treated as substitutes for wills by the 'possession or enjoyment' clause, but we doubt it. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Hugo Black, Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ It is strongly urged that we continue to regard May v. Heiner as controlling and leave its final repudiation to Congress. Little effort is made to defend the May v. Heiner interpretation of 'possession or enjoyment' on the ground that it truly reflects the congressional purpose, nor do we think it possible to attribute such a purpose to Congress. There is no persuasive argument, if any at all, that trusts reserving life estates with remainders over at grantors' eaths are not satisfactory and effective substitutes for wills. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Hugo Black, Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ Certain corporate stocks were transferred to the trust with grant of power to the trustees to hold and sell the stocks and to reinvest the proceeds. Church reserved no power to alter, amend, or revoke, but required the trustees to pay him the income for life. This reservation of life income is the decisive factor here. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Hugo Black, Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ Helvering v. Hallock was decided in 1940. Three separate trusts were considered in the Hallock case. These three trusts as those considered in the St. Louis Union Trust and Becker cases, had been executed with provisions for reversion of the trust properties to the grantors should the grantors outlive the beneficiaries. The trusts had been executed in 1917, 1919, and 1925. In the Hallock case this Court was again asked to limit the effect of § 811 (c) by emphasis upon the formal passage of legal title. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Hugo Black, Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue…

“ After argument and consideration of the cases at the October 1947 Term, an order was entered restoring them to the docket and requesting counsel upon reargument particularly to discuss certain questions broader in scope than those originally presented and argued. ”

Hugo Black

Summary

Quotes from Spiegel's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue… (Hugo Black)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature