Berger v. Commissioner

1 Citing case

  1. Davis v. Comm'r

    716 F.3d 560 (11th Cir. 2013)   Cited 4 times

    However, § 1041 does not apply to dispositions of assets, whether or not they were previously transferred between spouses incident to divorce. See, e.g., id. (stating that while the transfer of stock options was shielded by § 1041, their subsequent exercise will create tax consequences for the receiving spouse); I.R.S. Priv. Ltr. Rul. 200646003 (Nov. 17, 2006) (same); see also Berger v. Comm'r, 71 T.C.M. (CCH) 2160, 2162 (1996) (holding that, where husband transferred his interest in the couple's business to wife and wife subsequently sold the business, “the gain on the sale of [the business] is attributable in its entirety” to wife). Moreover, Mr. Davis's argument does not serve the goals of § 1041. “[T]he rationale behind the adoption of § 1041 [was] to facilitate[ ] the division of a marital estate incident to divorce without taxation to the spouse who is withdrawing assets from the marital estate.”