26 U.S.C. § 2043

Transfers for insufficient consideration

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 26 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In general

If any one of the transfers, trusts, interests, rights, or powers enumerated and described in sections 2035 to 2038, inclusive, and section 2041 is made, created, exercised, or relinquished for a consideration in money or money’s worth, but is not a bona fide sale for an adequate and full consideration in money or money’s worth, there shall be included in the gross estate only the excess of the fair market value at the time of death of the property otherwise to be included on account of such transaction, over the value of the consideration received therefor by the decedent.

(b) Marital rights not treated as consideration(1) In general

For purposes of this chapter, a relinquishment or promised relinquishment of dower or curtesy, or of a statutory estate created in lieu of dower or curtesy, or of other marital rights in the decedent’s property or estate, shall not be considered to any extent a consideration “in money or money’s worth”.

(2) Exception

For purposes of section 2053 (relating to expenses, indebtedness, and taxes), a transfer of property which satisfies the requirements of paragraph (1) of section 2516 (relating to certain property settlements) shall be considered to be made for an adequate and full consideration in money or money’s worth.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 388; Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title IV, § 425(a)(1), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 803.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1984—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–369 amended subsec. (b) generally, designating existing provisions as par. (1) and adding par. (2).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1984 Amendment

Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title IV, § 425(c)(1), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 804, provided that: “The amendments made by subsection (a) [amending this section and section 2053 of this title] shall apply to estates of decedents dying after the date of the enactment of this Act [July 18, 1984].”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 18 cases, 1934–2011 · leading case: Est. of Shapiro v. United States, 634 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Est. of Shapiro v. United States, 634 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 4× “494 (1984), appears to have supplanted the inquiry by amending 26 U.S.C. §§ 2043 & 2053 to allow the relinquishment of marital rights to qualify as consideration supporting deductions if certain criteria are met.”

Est. of Cyril I. Magnin, Deceased Donald Isaac Magnin v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 184 F.3d 1074 (9th Cir. 1999). · cites it 2× “Moreover, the Tax Court held that for purposes of the offset allowed under 26 U.S.C. § 2043 for the consideration that Cyril received, the trust property must be valued as of the time of Cyril’s death, while the consideration he received must be valued as of the time of the…”

Est. of Abraham v. Comm'r, 408 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2005). “” It should be noted that the Commissioner did give the Estate credit for the $160,000 payments under 26 U.S.C. § 2043 , offsetting these payments from the full value of the underlying asset.”

Est. of Lydia G. Maxwell, Deceased First Nat'l Bank of Long Island Victor C. McCuaig Jr., Executors v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 3 F.3d 591 (1st Cir. 1993). “Section 20kS The petitioner argues finally that the tax court should be reversed because, under 26 U.S.C. § 2043 , if there was any consideration in money or money’s worth paid to the decedent, even if the payment was inadequate, the Estate is at least entitled to an exclusion…”

Whiteley v. United States, 214 F. Supp. 489 (W.D. Wash. 1963). · cites it 5× “§ 2036 (a); and if not, then second, was there any consideration received on the transfer which must be credited under 26 U.S.C.A. § 2043 (a). 4 In this case Mrs.”

United States v. Howard Past, of the Est. of Edna C. Rosedale Ogg, Deceased, 347 F.2d 7 (9th Cir. 1965). “” 26 U.S.C. § 2043 provides in part: “Transfers for insufficient consideration “(a) In general.”

Est. of Isabelle M. Sparling, Deceased. Crocker Citizens Nat'l Bank, Tr. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 552 F.2d 1340 (9th Cir. 1977). “Internal Revenue Code of 1954, § 2043, 26 U.S.C. § 2043 . Section 2043(a) provides as follows: “(a) In general.”

United States v. Richard S. Righter, of the Est. of Edna Beaham Mersereau, Deceased, 400 F.2d 344 (8th Cir. 1968). “This case presents a federal estate tax issue under § 2043(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C. § 2043 (a). 1 The statute concerns the measure of includability in the gross estate of a decedent’s inter vivos transfer made for an insufficient consideration.”

Pittman v. United States, 878 F. Supp. 833 (E.D.N.C. 1994). “26 U.S.C. § 2043 (a); 26 C.F.R. § 20.2043-1 .”

Milton J. Grossman, Indep. of the Est. of James A. Stavely, Deceased v. Ellis Campbell, Jr., Dist. Dir. of Internal Revenue, 368 F.2d 206 (5th Cir. 1966). “Stavely to an election, that he elected to take under the will, and hence that his estate is entitled to a deduction under 26 U.S.C.A. § 2043 (a) as construed in Vardell’s Estate v.”

United States v. Martin Wright Gordon, 406 F.2d 332 (5th Cir. 1969). “26 U.S.C.A. § 2043 . Transfers for insuf-cient consideration (a) In general.”

Russell-Miller Milling Co. v. Helvering, 69 F.2d 392 (D.C. Cir. 1934). “805 , 26 USCA § 2043) provides that such credits shall be taken for tlie taxable year in which “paid or accrued,” or “paid or incurred,” according to the method of accounting used in computing the taxpayer’s net income.”

Show all 18 citing cases →

— 26 U.S.C. § 2043(a) — 1 case

Whiteley v. United States, 214 F. Supp. 489 (W.D. Wash. 1963). “§ 2036 (a); and if not, then second, was there any consideration received on the transfer which must be credited under 26 U.S.C.A. § 2043 (a). 4 In this case Mrs.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.