FUTURE INTERESTS - TAXATION - EVIDENCE - PRESUMPTION AS TO THE POSSIBILITY OF A WOMAN BEARING CHILDREN

Authors

Hobart Taylor, Jr., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Testatrix, a resident of Massachusetts, set up a trust of her residuary estate for her two daughters, the principal to be paid to their issue, but if either should die without issue, her share to be paid to certain named charities. On probate, the remainder to charity was held to be void. The income tax law of Massachusetts imposed a three per cent levy on income accumulated for contingent future interests, but exempted from taxation certain interests of nonresidents, including vested remainders not subject to being divested. The daughters, nonresidents, contended that their interests should not be taxed as contingent and introduced evidence before the appellate tax board to show that they were unmarried and had never borne issue, that one of them was sixty-two years of age, that the other was fifty-two years old and had undergone a surgical operation which made it impossible for her to bear children. Held, for the purpose of the income tax statute, it is permissible to introduce medical evidence to rebut the presumption that a woman is always capable of bearing issue. Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation v. Bullard, (Mass. 1943) 46 N.E. (2d) 557.

Recommended Citation

Hobart Taylor, Jr., FUTURE INTERESTS - TAXATION - EVIDENCE - PRESUMPTION AS TO THE POSSIBILITY OF A WOMAN BEARING CHILDREN, 42 Mich. L. Rev. 167 (1943).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol42/iss1/13