What's Implied in Bongard

From David A. Handler of Kirkland & Ellis in Chicago we have this report on the latest development in the Tax Court's understanding of the Internal Revenue Code Section 2036(a): On March 15, the court issued a decision in Estate of Wayne C. Bongard v. Comm'r, 124 T.C. No. 8; No. 6141-03, finding that a decedent hadn't transferred property to his family partnership in a bona fide sale for an adequate

From David A. Handler of Kirkland & Ellis in Chicago we have this report on the latest development in the Tax Court's understanding of the Internal Revenue Code Section 2036(a): On March 15, the court issued a decision in Estate of Wayne C. Bongard v. Comm'r, 124 T.C. No. 8; No. 6141-03, finding that a decedent hadn't transferred property to his family partnership “in a bona fide sale for an adequate consideration,” and that he'd retained an “implied” beneficial enjoyment of

All access premium subscription

Your subscription will include 12 months of Trusts & Estates magazine and access to premium content on WealthManagement.com.

Hide comments

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Publish