OSullivan v. C.I.R. T.C. Memo. 1994-17; 1993 WL 548585 (U.S.Tax Ct.); 67
T.C.M. (CCH) 1968;T.C.M. (RIA) 94,017; 1994 RIA TC Memo 94,017 Tax Court,1993. Jan. 12, 1994. COUNSEL:
Shirley Osullivan,
pro se. William
A. McCarthy and Thomas E. Carter, for respondent. MEMORANDUM
FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION JACOBS,
Judge: Respondent
determined transferee liability under section 6901 against Shirley Osullivan,
Anne Marie Osullivan, Nancy C. Osullivan, and Frank J. Osullivan
in the amounts of $4,310, $1,615, $1,615, and $1,615, respectively, plus
interest, for unpaid 1983 Federal income taxes, and additions to tax, due from
Frank P. Osullivan (decedent). Unless
otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in
effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court
Rules of Practice and Procedure. The
issues for decision are (1) Whether petitioners Frank J. Osullivan,
Anne Marie Osullivan, and Nancy C. Osullivan are liable as
transferees for the unpaid 1983 Federal income tax liability of decedent, and,
if so, the amount of such liability, including the amount of interest thereon;
and (2) whether petitioner Shirley Osullivan is liable in her
capacity as a fiduciary of the estate of decedent for all or part of the 1983
Federal income tax liability of decedent, and, if so, the amount of such
liability, including the amount of interest thereon. FINDINGS
OF FACT Some of the facts have been stipulated
and are found accordingly. The stipulation of facts and attached exhibits are
incorporated herein by this reference. At the
time the petition in this case was filed, all petitioners resided in
California. Shirley
Osullivan (Shirley) and decedent were divorced in 1969. They had
three children together, Anne Marie Osullivan, Nancy C. Osullivan,
and Frank J. Osullivan (children). Decedent
did not file Federal income tax returns for 1983, 1984, or 1985. Decedent died
on April 23, 1986. At the time of decedents death, each of the
children had reached the age of majority. Shirley
was executrix of decedents estate. She hired an attorney and an
accountant to help her. Decedents records consisted primarily of
shoeboxes of receipts and mail, much of it unopened. Upon examining decedents
records, Shirley became aware of decedents failure to file Federal
income tax returns for 1984 and 1985. She was not aware that decedent did not
file for 1983 because his records contained a photocopy of a 1983 Federal
income tax return that was filled out and signed, but not dated, by decedent. Shirley,
her attorney, her accountant, and James Clerf (Clerf), an IRS representative,
conferred several times in order to settle the estate and satisfy the IRS. On
June 30, 1987, Clerf sent a letter to Shirleys attorney stating that
decedent owed a total of $3,995 for taxable year 1984 and $3,223 for taxable year
1985. No mention was made in the letter of taxable year 1983. After settling
the liabilities for taxable years 1984 and 1985, the estate was closed on
August 28, 1987. Pursuant
to an Order Settling Final Account and for Distribution Under Will,
issued by the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles,
Shirley distributed the following amounts on the following dates in her
capacity as executrix of decedents estate: Dates of Distributions Amounts Anne Marie Osullivan 7/28/87 $ 700 8/25/87 400 9/11/87 515 ------- $1,615 Nancy C. Osullivan: 7/28/87 $ 700 8/25/87 400 9/11/87 515 ------- $1,615 Frank J. Osullivan: 7/28/87 $ 700 9/10/87 915 ------- $1,615 Shirley Osullivan: 8/12/87 $ 700 8/25/87 1,100 9/10/87 2,510 ------- $4,310 The
$4,310 paid to Shirley represented statutory executrix commissions, including
preventing foreclosure of decedents home by arranging for a sale of
the premises shortly before a foreclosure sale. Although decedent bequeathed
Shirley a share of his estate, she did not accept her share, preferring to let
it pass to the children. After
the distributions of the funds identified above, the estate had no remaining
assets. On September 1, 1987, Shirley received a letter from the IRS stating
that the IRS had never received a 1983 Federal income tax return from decedent.
She mailed the IRS a copy of decedents 1983 Federal income tax
return. The IRS did not allow any of the expenses reflected on Schedule A of
decedents 1983 Federal income tax return, and determined a deficiency
in excess of the full amount transferred to petitioners. Consequently, the IRS
asserted against petitioners the full amounts transferred to them, plus
interest as provided by law, as section 6901 transferee liability. The
parties have since agreed that $18,522 of the expenses reflected on Schedule A
of decedents 1983 Federal income tax return is to be allowed. By
allowing the foregoing $18,522 of expenses, decedents corrected 1983
Federal income tax liability is as follows: Additions to Tax Deficiency Sec. 6651(a)(1) Sec. 6651(a)(2) Sec. 6654 $3,628 $816 $907 $120 OPINION I. Transferee Liability for Unpaid Taxes Pursuant
to section 6901(a)(1)(A), in appropriate circumstances, respondent may assess
and collect from a transferee of assets the unpaid income tax liability of the
transferor. Phillips v. Commissioner, 283
U.S. 589, 592, 593 n. 3 (1931) (discussing Revenue Act of 1926, ch. 27,
sec. 280, 44 Stat. 9, 61, which was the predecessor to sec. 6901); Gumm v.
Commissioner, 93
T.C. 475, 479 (1989), affd. without published opinion 933 F.2d 1014 (9th
Cir.1991). Section 6901 provides, in part: (a)
METHOD OF COLLECTION.The amounts of the following liabilities shall *
* * be assessed, paid, and collected in the same manner and subject to the same
provisions and limitations as in the case of the taxes with respect to which
the liabilities were incurred: (1)
INCOME, ESTATE, AND GIFT TAXES. (A)
TRANSFEREES.--The liability, at law or in equity, of a transferee of property (i) of
a taxpayer in the case of a tax imposed by subtitle A (relating to income
taxes), * * * (b) LIABILITY.--Any liability referred
to in subsection (a) may be either as to the amount of tax shown on a return or
as to any deficiency or underpayment of tax. Section
6901(h) provides that a transferee may be a donee, heir, legatee, devisee, or
distributee. Courts have defined a transferee as a person who takes or receives
property of another without full, fair and adequate consideration to
the prejudice of creditors. United States v. Floersch, 276 F.2d 714, 717 (10th
Cir.1960). Respondent
has the burden of proving all of the elements necessary to establish
petitioners liability as transferees, but not to show that decedent
was liable for the tax. Sec. 6902(a); Rule 142(d). If respondent carries this
burden of proof, the transferee is liable for the transferors taxes
due for the year of the transfer and for prior years, as well as any additions
to tax, to the extent the amount of such does not exceed the value of the
assets transferred. Estate of Glass v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 543, 575 (1970), affd.
453 F.2d 1375 (5th Cir.1972). Here, since the value of the assets transferred
to each of the children is less than the amount of taxes, additions to tax, and
interest due from decedent for taxable year 1983, the maximum transferee
liability of each child is the amount transferred, plus interest. The
determination as to the transferees liability for the transferors
obligation, and the extent of that liability, depends upon State law. Commissioner
v. Stern, 357 U.S. 39, 45 (1958); Adams
v. Commissioner,
70 T.C. 373, 389 (1978), affd. without published opinion 688 F.2d 815 (2d
Cir.1982). All transfers in this case occurred in California; hence California
law governs. Adams v. Commissioner, supra at 390. The
applicable California law here is California Civil Code section 3439.05 (West
1993 Supp.), which provides: A
transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor
whose claim arose before the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred
if the debtor made the transfer or incurred the obligation without receiving a
reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation and the
debtor was insolvent at that time or the debtor became insolvent as a result of
the transfer or obligation. Thus,
in order to establish that the children are liable as transferees for the
amounts they received from decedents estate, respondent must prove
that: (1) Decedent owed a debt to the IRS; (2) the IRS claim against
decedent arose before the transfer was made; (3) decedent (or decedents
estate) made the transfer without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in
exchange for the transfer; and (4) decedent was insolvent at the time of, or
became insolvent as a result of, the transfer. Addressing
the first element, California Civil Code section 3439.01 (West 1993 Supp.)
defines a debtor as a person who is liable on a
claim. Decedent is liable to the IRS on a claim for his 1983 Federal
income tax liability. Hence, the first requirement has been met. As for
the second requirement, the IRS is a creditor whose claim against decedent
arose before the transfer was made. Assessment of the tax before the transfer
is not necessary; the tax is ascertainable when the tax period ends, and if the
tax is not paid when due, the IRS is considered to be a creditor as of the
close of the applicable tax year. See In re Serignese, 214 F.Supp. 917 (D.Conn.1963),
affd. sub nom. Goring v. United States, 330 F.2d 960 (2d. Cir.1964); LaMothe v.
Commissioner, T.C.Memo. 1990-63.
The tax period has ended, the tax was not paid when due, and the due date was
prior to the transfer date. Thus, the second requirement has been met. Regarding
the third requirement, decedent (and decedents estate) did not
receive a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the
transferred assets. The children did not provide any consideration in return
for their shares. Thus, the third requirement has been met. With
regard to the fourth requirement, decedents estate was rendered
insolvent as a result of the transfers. We have held that the transferee is
liable irrespective of the particular moment at which the transferor lapsed
into insolvency, if such insolvency results no later than at the end of a
series of transfers. Hagaman v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 180 (1993); Hamar v.
Commissioner, 42
T.C. 867 (1964); Don v. Commissioner, T.C.Memo. 1971-130, supplemented by
T.C.Memo. 1972-31; see also Security Counselors, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C.Memo. 1989-580; G & G
Records, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C.Memo. 1983-343. Hence, the fourth requirement has
been met. Because
all four requirements have been met, each of the children is severally liable
as a transferee for the amount each received from decedents estate. Mann
v. Commissioner,
T.C.Memo. 1976-78. In
cases like the one at barwhere the value of the assets transferred is
less than the Federal tax liability of the transferor and the transferee
liability arises under State law--the interest liability of the transferee from
the date of transfer to the date of the notice of transferee liability is
determined by State law. Patterson v. Sims, 281 F.2d 577, 580-581 (5th Cir.1960); Estate
of Stein v. Commissioner, 37 T.C. 945, 961 (1962). California Civil Code section 3287 (West
1970) states: Every person who is entitled to recover damages certain,
or capable of being made certain by calculation, and the right to recover which
is vested in him on a particular day, is entitled also to recover interest
thereon from that day. Hence, under California law, respondent has
the right to interest on the payments received by the transferees from the date
each transfer was made until the issuance of the notice of transferee
liability. See Don v. Commissioner, T.C.Memo.1972-31; see also Stein v. Southern Cal.
Edison Co., 7
Cal.App. 4th 565, 8 Cal.Rptr.2d 907 (1992). The legal rate of interest in
California is 7 percent. Cal.Civ.Code sec. 1916-1 (West 1970). Therefore, each
of the children is liable for interest, at a rate of 7 percent, from the date
of transfer to him or her until the date of the issuance of the notice of
transferee liability to him or her. Each is also liable for interest from the
latter date until his or her liability is paid. Estate of Stein v.
Commissioner, supra;
see Baptiste v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 252 (1993). The rates for the latter interest
are as provided under sections 6601 and 6621 of the Internal Revenue Code. 2.
Fiduciary Liability for Unpaid Taxes Under
31 U.S.C. section 3713 (1988), A representative of a person or an
estate * * * paying any part of a debt of the person or the estate before
paying a claim of the Government is liable to the extent of the payment for
unpaid claims of the Government. Courts
have departed from a literal interpretation of this statute by holding that the
fiduciary is liable only if, at the time of distribution, such fiduciary had
either (1) actual knowledge of the liability to the Government, or (2) notice
of such facts as would put a reasonably prudent person on inquiry as to the
existence of the unpaid claim of the United States. See, e.g., Leigh v.
Commissioner, 72
T.C. 1105, 1110 (1979); Bank of the West v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 462, 474 (1989); Frost
v. Commissioner,
T.C.Memo. 1993-94. Once the fiduciary is charged with knowledge of the debt, an
honest belief that the liability would be paid does not relieve the fiduciary
of liability; the fiduciary has a duty to see that the debt is, in fact, paid. Leigh
v. Commissioner,
72 T.C. 1105, 1110 (1979). Shirley
was a credible witness. She testified that she was not aware of the 1983
Federal income tax liability until after she made the distributions. We are
satisfied that Shirley did not know of decedents 1983 Federal income
tax liability when she made the distributions. Further, in light of the
photocopy of decedents 1983 Federal income tax return she possessed
and her contacts with the IRS, we are satisfied that she was not on notice of
such facts as would put a reasonably prudent person on inquiry as to the
existence of the unpaid claim of the United States. In any event, expenses of
administering an estate--a category that includes the executrix commissions to
Shirley-- ordinarily enjoy priority over nonlien Federal tax claims despite the
insolvency statute (formerly Revised Statutes Section 3466 (1988), now 31 U.S.C.
Section 3713). See, e.g., Kennebec Box Co. v. O.S. Richards Corp., 5 F.2d 951 (2d Cir.1925); Smith
v. Commissioner,
24 B.T.A. 807 (1931); United States v. Weisburn, 48 F.Supp. 393, 397
(E.D.Pa.1943); see Rev. Rul. 80-112, 1980-1 C.B. 306. Consequently, we hold
that Shirley is not liable as a fiduciary of decedents estate.
Accordingly, she is not liable as a fiduciary in respect of the $4,100 received
as compensation for services she provided as executrix of the estate. To
reflect the foregoing, Decision
will be entered under Rule 155. |