Philadelphia Trust, Safe Deposit & Ins. v. McCoach

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Philadelphia Trust, Safe Deposit & Ins. v. McCoach, 129 F. 906 (3d Cir. 1904)
64 C.C.A. 338; 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4105

Philadelphia Trust, Safe Deposit & Ins. v. McCoach

Opinion of the Court

DALLAS, Circuit Judge.

In this case the interest of a daughter in her father’s estate, which, by the terms of his will, she was not to take unless she should survive her mother, was adjudged to be liable to tax, notwithstanding the statutory exemption from such tax of “a contingent beneficial interest not absolutely vested in possession or enj oyment.” That this adjudication was erroneous is shown in the opinion filed herewith, in the case of Land Title & Trust Company, Executor, etc., v. McCoach, Collector of Internal Revenue, 129 Fed. 901, and in the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Holmes’ Appeal, 116 Pa. 246, 9 Atl. 341.

The judgment of the Circuit Court in favor of the defendant upon his demurrer to the plaintiffs’ statement of claim is reversed, and the cause will be remanded to that court, with direction to enter judgment thereon in favor of the plaintiffs.

Reference

Full Case Name
PHILADELPHIA TRUST, SAFE DEPOSIT & INS. CO. v. McCOACH, Internal Revenue Collector
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published
Syllabus
1. Internal Revenue — Legacy Taxes — Vested or Contingent Remainder. The interest of a daughter in her father’s estate, which, by the terms of his will, she was not to take unless she survived her mother, was contingent, and not vested, and did not become subject to legacy tax, under section 29 of the war revenue act of June 13, 1898, c. 448, 30 Stat. 464 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 2307], where her 'mother was living July 1, 1902, after which time contingent beneficial interests vested in possession or enjoyment were exempted from the tax by the amendment of June 27, 1902, c. 1160, § 3, 32 Stat. 406 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1903, p. 282]..