http://www.oyez.org/issues/federal-taxation/federal-taxation-gifts/ U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en-us http://www.oyez.org/images/oyezfeed.jpg U.S. Supreme Court Audio Recordings, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) Wed, 12 Oct 1977 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 76-1058_19771012-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_76_1058/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 05 Oct 1992 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 91-998_19921005-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1992/1992_91_998/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Tue, 12 Nov 1996 12:00:00 -0500 <p>The executors of Otis C. Hubert's substantial estate filed a federal estate tax return about a year after his death. Subsequently, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue issued a notice of deficiency, claiming underreporting of federal estate tax liability caused by the estate's asserted entitlement to marital and charitable deductions. While the estate's redetermination petition was pending in the Tax Court, the interested parties settled on the use of the estate's assets. The agreement divided the estate's principal, assumed to be worth $26 million, equally between marital trusts and a charitable trust. It also provided that the estate would pay its administration expenses either from the principal or the income of the assets. The estate paid about $500,000 of its nearly $2 million of administration expenses from principal and the rest from income. It then recalculated its tax liability, reducing the marital and charitable deductions by the amount of principal, but not the amount of income, used to pay the expenses. The Commissioner concluded that using income for expenses required a dollar for dollar reduction of the deductions. The Tax Court disagreed, finding that no reduction was required by reason of the executors' power, or the exercise of their power, to pay administration expenses from income. The Court of Appeals affirmed.</p> <p>The executors of Otis C. Hubert's substantial estate filed a federal estate tax return about a year after his death. Subsequently, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue issued a notice of deficiency, claiming underreporting of federal estate tax liability caused by the estate's asserted entitlement to marital and charitable deductions. While the estate's redetermination petition was pending in the Tax Court, the interested parties settled on the use of the estate's assets. The agreement divided the estate's principal, assumed to be worth $26 million, equally between marital trusts and a charitable trust. It also provided that the estate would pay its administration expenses either from the principal or the income of the assets. The estate paid about $500,000 of its nearly $2 million of administration expenses from principal and the rest from income. It then recalculated its tax liability, reducing the marital and charitable deductions by the amount of principal, but not the amount of income, used to pay the expenses. The Commissioner concluded that using income for expenses required a dollar for dollar reduction of the deductions. The Tax Court disagreed, finding that no reduction was required by reason of the executors' power, or the exercise of their power, to pay administration expenses from income. The Court of Appeals affirmed.</p><br/><br/><p>Does the cost of administering an estate necessarily reduce the allowed estate-tax deduction for assets left to a spouse or charity?</p> 95-1402_19961112-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1996/1996_95_1402/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Wed, 12 Oct 1977 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 76-1095_19771012-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_76_1095/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 26 Mar 1990 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 89-98_19900326-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1989/1989_89_98/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Tue, 01 Nov 1983 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 82-1041_19831101-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1041/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 28 Nov 1988 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 87-963_19881128-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_87_963/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Tue, 12 Nov 1991 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 90-1278_19911112-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1991/1991_90_1278/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Tue, 01 Dec 1981 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 80-1614_19811201-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1981/1981_80_1614/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:00:00 -0500 <p>Abel Galletti and his wife, along with another couple, the Briguglios, formed a business partnership. The partnership underpaid its federal employment taxes, and the IRS assessed the unpaid taxes against the partnership (meaning the partnership would be forced to pay the taxes). According to the Internal Revenue Code, if a tax debt is assessed within three years after the return was filed, the government has 10 additional years to collected the money.</p> <p>More than three years later, the Gallettis and the Briguglios separately filed for bankruptcy. The IRS made a claim in bankruptcy court against the two couples for the taxes assessed against the partnership. The couples objected, arguing that because the partners themselves had not been separately assessed, the statute of limitations had not been extended to the partners.</p> <p>The bankruptcy court ruled against the IRS, holding that the IRS must assess tax claims against individual partners, not just the partnership, in order to later collect on those claims from the individuals. The district court and a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel both affirmed the decision.</p> <p>Abel Galletti and his wife, along with another couple, the Briguglios, formed a business partnership. The partnership underpaid its federal employment taxes, and the IRS assessed the unpaid taxes against the partnership (meaning the partnership would be forced to pay the taxes). According to the Internal Revenue Code, if a tax debt is assessed within three years after the return was filed, the government has 10 additional years to collected the money.</p> <p>More than three years later, the Gallettis and the Briguglios separately filed for bankruptcy. The IRS made a claim in bankruptcy court against the two couples for the taxes assessed against the partnership. The couples objected, arguing that because the partners themselves had not been separately assessed, the statute of limitations had not been extended to the partners.</p> <p>The bankruptcy court ruled against the IRS, holding that the IRS must assess tax claims against individual partners, not just the partnership, in order to later collect on those claims from the individuals. The district court and a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel both affirmed the decision.</p><br/><br/><p>To qualify for the 10-year extension in the statute of limitations, does the government need to assess - beyond just the partnership that owes money - each individual partner for the debt?</p> 02-1389_20040112-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2003/2003_02_1389/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Wed, 05 Mar 1986 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 84-1944_19860305-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_84_1944/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Mon, 06 Dec 1993 12:00:00 -0500 No details yet. No details yet.<br/><br/>No details yet. 92-1546_19931206-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1993/1993_92_1546/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist