Estate of Cristofani v. Commissioner
97 T.C. 74, 1991 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 68, 97 T.C. No. 5 (1991)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A beneficiary's unrestricted legal right to withdraw a contribution from a trust for a limited period constitutes a gift of a present interest for purposes of the annual gift tax exclusion under § 2503(b), even if the beneficiary holds only a contingent remainder interest in the trust and is unlikely to exercise the withdrawal right.
Facts:
- In 1984, Maria Cristofani established an irrevocable trust for her two children and five grandchildren.
- The children were the primary beneficiaries, entitled to receive trust income and, after Cristofani's death, the trust principal.
- The five grandchildren held contingent remainder interests, meaning they would only receive trust assets if their respective parent (Cristofani's child) predeceased Cristofani or died within 120 days of her.
- The trust instrument granted both the children and the grandchildren the unrestricted right to withdraw up to the annual gift tax exclusion amount ($10,000) for a 15-day period following any contribution to the trust.
- In 1984 and 1985, Cristofani transferred property valued at $70,000 each year to the trust.
- For both years, Cristofani claimed seven annual gift tax exclusions of $10,000 each—one for each child and one for each grandchild.
- None of the five grandchildren exercised their right of withdrawal, and there was no pre-existing agreement that they would not do so.
Procedural Posture:
- The Estate of Maria Cristofani filed a Federal estate tax return, claiming annual exclusions for gifts made to decedent's children and grandchildren in 1984 and 1985.
- The Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Respondent) disallowed the five annual exclusions claimed for the grandchildren for both years, asserting they were not gifts of a present interest.
- The Commissioner determined a deficiency of $49,486 in the estate's Federal estate tax.
- The Estate of Maria Cristofani (Petitioner) filed a petition in the U.S. Tax Court, the court of first instance for this matter, to challenge the Commissioner's deficiency determination.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Do transfers of property to a trust constitute gifts of a present interest qualifying for the annual gift tax exclusion under section 2503(b), where beneficiaries with only contingent remainder interests in the trust are given an unrestricted right to withdraw an amount up to the exclusion limit for a 15-day period following the transfer?
Opinions:
Majority - Ruwe, J.
Yes, transfers of property to the trust constitute gifts of a present interest. The court holds that a beneficiary's legal right to demand immediate possession of trust corpus qualifies as a present interest, regardless of the likelihood they will exercise that right or the nature of their other interests in the trust. The court adopted the test from Crummey v. Commissioner, which focuses on the legal ability of the beneficiaries to exercise their withdrawal right and the trustee's inability to legally resist such a demand. The IRS argued that Crummey should not apply because the grandchildren held only contingent remainder interests and were not primary beneficiaries. The court rejected this distinction, stating that Crummey does not require beneficiaries to have a vested present or remainder interest to qualify. The existence of the legally enforceable right to withdraw funds is sufficient to create a present interest. The decedent's tax-saving motive for creating these withdrawal rights is irrelevant to the legal analysis.
Analysis:
This decision significantly broadened the application of the Crummey withdrawal power, solidifying its use as a major estate planning tool. The court clarified that the test for a present interest is purely a question of legal rights, not economic realities or the likelihood of exercise. By holding that even beneficiaries with remote, contingent interests can be valid Crummey power holders, the case allows grantors to multiply the number of annual gift tax exclusions available for transfers into a single trust. This precedent encourages the creation of trusts with numerous, nominal beneficiaries solely for the purpose of maximizing tax-free wealth transfer.
