Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Honorable Robert S. Calvert Opinion No. W-630 Comptrol~lerof Public Accounts Capitol Station Re: Whether corpus of trust Austin, Texas consisting of intangible property.held in Louisi- ana by Louisiana trustee is subject to Texas in- Dear Mr. Calvert: heritance tax' .~Inconnection .with.y-ourrequestfor an 'opinionon the "'above captioned matter you have~supplied us with the following facts. Ida Mitchell Looney, hereafter referred to as Decedent, was a resident of Dallas County, Texas, both at the time of her death and~at the time she executed an irrevocable trust agree- ment with Tulane 'University.'.Pursuant to.the agreement, .' certain stocks and a check for $3000 were turned over to Tulane~ University which was to pay the income to the Decedent during her lifetime~and upon the Decedent's death, to .distribute said income to her cousin for life. Upon the death of the Decedent's cousin,.TLilaneagreed to use such income for the support of the Thomas GreenProfessorship~of Education. The agreement is clearly a taxable transfer under that portion of particle '7117,Vernon's Civil Statutes, which imposes a tax upon transfers made '. . .by deed, grant, sale or gift made or intended to take effect in pos;ession or enjoyment after the death of the grantor or donor. if the property is "within the jurisdiction of this State... ."'.for inheritance tax -purposes The attorneys for the estate submit that since the property ,whichpassed at Decedent's death by virtue of the trust Instrument was intangible personal property which had acquired a fixed business situs in Louisiana, it is not within the jur- isdiction of this State for inheritance tax purposes. In the fclloiringcases the Supreme Court of the United States limited the right to tax intangibles (reserving the ques- tion of a decision in the.event such intangibles had acquired a business situs) to the decedent's domiciliars state. Farmer's Loan and Trust-Co. v. Minnesota, 2% U.S. 2014 (193G); Baldwin v. Missouri, 26i U.S. 503 1330 ; BeAdler v. South Carolina Tax Commission, 282.U.S. 1' 193d ; First National Ban;