§662 — Inclusion of amounts in gross income of beneficiaries of estates and trusts accumulating income or distributing corpus
40 cases·7 followed·2 distinguished·2 questioned·2 overruled·27 cited—18% support
Statute Text — 26 U.S.C. §662
Subject to subsection (b), there shall be included in the gross income of a beneficiary to whom an amount specified in section 661(a) is paid, credited, or required to be distributed (by an estate or trust described in section 661), the sum of the following amounts:
The amount of income for the taxable year required to be distributed currently to such beneficiary, whether distributed or not. If the amount of income required to be distributed currently to all beneficiaries exceeds the distributable net income (computed without the deduction allowed by section 642(c), relating to deduction for charitable, etc., purposes) of the estate or trust, then, in lieu of the amount provided in the preceding sentence, there shall be included in the gross income of the beneficiary an amount which bears the same ratio to distributable net income (as so computed) as the amount of income required to be distributed currently to such beneficiary bears to the amount required to be distributed currently to all beneficiaries. For purposes of this section, the phrase “the amount of income for the taxable year required to be distributed currently” includes any amount required to be paid out of income or corpus to the extent such amount is paid out of income for such taxable year.
All other amounts properly paid, credited, or required to be distributed to such beneficiary for the taxable year. If the sum of—
the amount of income for the taxable year required to be distributed currently to all beneficiaries, and
all other amounts properly paid, credited, or required to be distributed to all beneficiaries
exceeds the distributable net income of the estate or trust, then, in lieu of the amount provided in the preceding sentence, there shall be included in the gross income of the beneficiary an amount which bears the same ratio to distributable net income (reduced by the amounts specified in (A)) as the other amounts properly paid, credited or required to be distributed to the beneficiary bear to the other amounts properly paid, credited, or required to be distributed to all beneficiaries.
The amounts determined under subsection (a) shall have the same character in the hands of the beneficiary as in the hands of the estate or trust. For this purpose, the amounts shall be treated as consisting of the same proportion of each class of items entering into the computation of distributable net income as the total of each class bears to the total distributable net income of the estate or trust unless the terms of the governing instrument specifically allocate different classes of income to different beneficiaries. In the application of the preceding sentence, the items of deduction entering into the computation of distributable net income (including the deduction allowed under section 642(c)) shall be allocated among the items of distributable net income in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary. In the application of this subsection to the amount determined under paragraph (1) of subsection (a), distributable net income shall be computed without regard to any portion of the deduction under section 642(c) which is not attributable to income of the taxable year.
If the taxable year of a beneficiary is different from that of the estate or trust, the amount to be included in the gross income of the beneficiary shall be based on the distributable net income of the estate or trust and the amounts properly paid, credited, or required to be distributed to the beneficiary during any taxable year or years of the estate or trust ending within or with his taxable year.
40 Citing Cases
Accordingly, we need not decide whether petitioner satisfied the exception in section 469(c)(7)(B) which exempts certain real estate professionals from the $25,000 1 mitation of section 469(i) .
1964 Trust Section 662 governs the tax obligations of trust beneficiaries as to distributions from trusts which may accumulate income or distribute corpus.
2003-173 Accuracy-Related Penalty Respondent determined that petitioners are liable for an accuracy-related penalty under section 662 for negligence or disregard of rules or regulations . Section 6662(a) and (b)(1) . imposes a 20-percent penalty on an unde payment of tax that results from negligence or disregard of rules or regulations . Section 6662(c) defines the term "negli ence" to include "any failure to make a reasonable attempt to comply with the provisions of this title", .and the term "
uired to distribute currently all income received, are taxed only on income not actually distributed or required to be distributed to beneficiaries, secs. 641(a), 661, with a deduction for distributions included in beneficiaries' gross income under section 662, sec. 661(a). Beneficiaries must include section 662 distributions in their gross income in 2 tiers: First, “income * * * required to be distributed currently”, sec. 662(a)(1); and, second, all “other amounts properly paid, credited, or re
1964 Trust Section 662 governs the tax obligations of trust beneficiaries as to distributions from trusts which may accumulate income or distribute corpus.
- 11 - The DNI of an estate or trust limits the amount on which beneficiaries can be taxed under section 662.7 DNI is an "artificial concept" which ensures that trust beneficiaries are not taxed on more than "the trust's actual net income." Estate of Petschek v.
662 (West 1995). This presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing proof. Id. Dr. Ghafouri alone held legal title to the Shasta Place property and the Jasmine Court property and is presumed to be the properties' full beneficial or equitable owner. - 7 - [*7] The presumption that the legal owner is also the equitable owner may be o
Section 1.163-1(b), Income Tax Regs., however, provides that even ifa taxpayer is not directly liable on a bond or note secured by a mortgage, the taxpayermay nevertheless deduct the mortgage interest paid ifhe or she is the legal or equitable owner ofthe property subject to the mortgage.
California law provides that the owner oflegal title to property is presumed to be the owner offull beneficial title as well.
662 (West 1995) provides that "[t]he owner ofthe legal title to property is presumedto be the owner ofthe full beneficial title.
662, (West 1995). This presumption may be rebutted on y by clear and convincing proof. Id. Mr. Puentes solely held legal title to the San Francisco property and therefore is presumed the full beneficial (or equitable) owner ofit. Accordingly, petitioner must show that she was a beneficial or equitable owner ofthe San Francisco property by clea
Under section 7491(c), the Commissioner bears the burden ofproduction with regard to penalties and must come forward with sufficient evidence indicating that it is app opriate to impose penalties. See Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438, 446 (2001). Because the understatement ofincome tax is substantial, respondent has satisfied
" California Evidence CodenSection 662 states that " [t]he owner of thea legal title to property is presumed to be the owner of the full beneficial title.
,That efailure was neg gent at best and justifies the imposition of the section 662 penalty e a We turn to the, issue of reasonable cause and good faith unders section 6664 (c) .
tion is incorrect . Rule 142(a) ; Higbee v. Commissioner , su ra at 447 . To the extent the taxpayer shows there was reasonable,cause for an underpayment and that he acted in good faith, section 6664(c)(1) prohibits the imposition of a penalty under section 662 . Respondent determined a 20-percentlpenalty under section 6662(a) on the underpayment of tax resulting from petitioner' s disallowed itemized and business expense deductions . Respondent asserts that the underpayment is attributable to n
Section 662 1 Lastly, petitioner argues that his decision to invest in California Jojoba was not tax motivated ; therefore, section 6621(c) interest should not apply . This,Court generally does not have jurisdiction to review assessment of section 6621(c) tax motivated interest in affected items proceedings . See White v. Commissioner, 95 T .C . 20
662 (West 1995); see Pac. Sw. Realty Co. v. County of Los Anceles, 820 P.2d 1046, 1052 (Cal. 1991). - 11 - Beneficial ownership has been characterized as when "the buyer has the possession and use of the property to the complete exclusion of the seller, subject only to the seller's remedies in case of default." County of San Diego v. Davis, 3
This presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing proof. Id. In Uslu v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-551, the taxpayers, Mr. and Mrs. Uslu, made mortgage payments on a residence for which legal title was held by Mr. Uslu’s brother and sister-in- law. We found in Uslu that the taxpayers “exclusively held the benefits an