У нас вы можете посмотреть бесплатно Estate of Maxwell v. Commissioner Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained или скачать в максимальном доступном качестве, видео которое было загружено на ютуб. Для загрузки выберите вариант из формы ниже:
Если кнопки скачивания не
загрузились
НАЖМИТЕ ЗДЕСЬ или обновите страницу
Если возникают проблемы со скачиванием видео, пожалуйста напишите в поддержку по адресу внизу
страницы.
Спасибо за использование сервиса ClipSaver.ru
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 35,900 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Estate of Maxwell v. Commissioner | 3 F.3d 591 (1993) When you die, your beneficiaries may be responsible for paying taxes on the value of any assets you leave behind. Although there are some strategies to minimize the tax, the tax code includes provisions such as Section Twenty Thirty Six to prevent attempts to reduce the value of the taxable estate. In Estate of Maxwell versus Commissioner, we explore the applicability of this section. In nineteen eighty four, Lydia Maxwell conveyed her residence to her son and daughter in law, Winslow and Margaret Jane Maxwell, for two hundred seventy thousand dollars. Lydia forgave twenty thousand dollars of the price, and the Maxwells executed a mortgage note for the remainder. After the conveyance, the Maxwells leased the house back to Lydia. And, although the Maxwells paid Lydia interest on the mortgage, they never paid any principal. In addition, Lydia’s rent was nearly equal to the interest payments. Further, each year Lydia forgave twenty thousand dollars of the mortgage principal. Lydia lived in the house until she died in nineteen eighty six. In her will, Lydia forgave the remaining mortgage principal. The Maxwells later sold the house for over five hundred thousand dollars. On the estate tax return, Lydia’s estate reported only the remainder of the mortgage note as an asset. The commissioner of internal revenue determined that because Lydia retained a life estate, the full value of the property was taxable under Section Twenty Thirty Six A. The estate sought review in tax court, arguing that Section Twenty Thirty Six didn’t apply because the transfer was a bona fide sale for adequate and full consideration. The tax court disagreed and affirmed the commissioner’s determination. The estate appealed to the Second Circuit. Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/estate-... The Quimbee App features over 35,900 case briefs keyed to 984 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/estate-... Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... ► / twitter ► / quimbeedotcom #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries