Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

. . . . . THE AITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS September 25, 1957 Hon. Robert S. Calyert, OPINION NO. WW-262 Comptrol,lerof Public Accounts Capitol Station Re: Whether deceased joint Austin, Texas tenant's interest is subject to inheritance tf;Etnder submitted Dear Mr. Calvert: . We quote the following excerpt from your letter requesting the opinion of this office on the above cap- tioned matter. "An inheritance tax report has been filed with this department for the estate of Nellie R. Dillln who died intestate a resident of th'o Stata of Iowa by the decedent's two surviving sisters, Mrs. Cora B. Watts and Mary Lois Dlllin. "The only property owned by the deceased In the State of Texas is an undivided one-third (l/3) Interest in 320 acres in the John Mark Survey, Abstract 555, Harris County, fully described In a deed dated October 16, 1926, of record in Volume 681, page 126, of the Harris County Deed Records, in which the father of Mrs. Cora B. Watts, Mary Lois Dlllln, Blanche T, Dillln and Nellie R. Dillin, conveyed the property to them, his four daughters, as joint tenants with tha express pro- vision that upon the death or deaths of any of the four grantees the survivors of them would take the title to said property. Blanche T. Dlllln died in 1952, and her undivided one- fourth (l/4) interest did not have sufficient value at that time to tax. The statut,oryexemp- ions of the three surviving sisters exceeded the value of the Texas property." You state that the undivided one-third interest of Nellie R. Dlllin now exceeds the statutory exemption and request the opfnion of this office as to whether that interest was, upon passing to the survivors, subject to an inheritance tax, Hon. Robert S. Calvert Page 2 Opinion No. ww-262 A joint tenancv ma?7legally exist in Texas if expressly created by c&tract,- Chandler v. Kountze 130 S.W. 2d 327 (Tex. Civ. App., 1939 Error ref.) Adams v. Jones, 258 S.W. 2d 402 (Tex. Civ. App., 1953). -The foll.owingdefinition of a joint tenancy is given in 14 Am. Jur.79, Cotenancy, Seti;6. "An estate In joint tenancy Is one held by two or more persons jointly, with equal rights to share In its enjoyment during their lives, and having as its distinguishing feature the right of survivorship or jus accrescendi, by virtue of which the entire estate, upon the death of any of the joint tenants, goes to the survivors, and so on to the last survivor, who takes an estata of inheritance free and exempt from all charges made by his deceased co-tenants. . .' This being the nature of the estate which was ,. created by the deed from the father to the sisters, the question is whether on th,edeath of Nellie A. Dillin - there was a taxable transfer under Article 7117, Vernon's Civil Statutes. The pertinent portions of Article 7117 are the following: "All property within the jurisdiction of this State, . D .whfch shall.pass abso- lutely or in trust by will OP by the laws of descent or distribution of this or any other State, or by deed, grant, sale, or gift made or intended to take effect in possession or enjoyment after the death of the grantor or donor, shalLupon pass- ing. e . be subject to a tax. 0 . o Any transfer made by a grantor, vendor, or donor, whether by deed, grant, sale, or gift, shall, unless shown to the contrary, be deemed to have been made in contempla- tion of death and subject to the same tax as herein provided if such transfer is made within two (23 years prior to the death of the grantor, vendor, or d,onor,of a material part of his estate, or fi the tran- sfer made within such period is in the nature of a final distribution of property and without adaquate valuable consideration." -2- Hon. Robert S. Calvert Page 3 Opinion No. ww-262 The general rule is that no tax may be imposed in respect to property acquired by survivorship in case of a joint tenancy under statutory provisions taxing trans- fers by will or by intestate laws. 85 C.J.S. 902, Taxa- tion, Sec. 1143; Attorney General v. Clark, 110 N,E. 299 (Mass. Sup, 1915); bl C J 1650 note 4a; In re.Rentz's Estate, 61 N. W. 2d 148'(Mi%. Sup. 1953) * In 4 C.C.H. Inheritance, Estate and Gift Tax Re- porter, par. 1570B, p. 80,212, the following explanation of the general rule is given. .Jointly owned property is usually considered taxable only by speolfic statu- tory provision, because, owing to the fact that the interest of the decedent passes by right of survivorship there Is not a transfer by will or under the Intestate laws, so that a specific provision is necessary to bring such joint estates within the scope and operation of the act. The cases, In fact, are almost unanimous in holding that the interest of the survivor comes not by inherit- ance or succession, and that, accordingly there is no transfer under the intestate laws. The theory on which the taxation of such property Is justified is that, while the vest- ing of the entire estate by right of survlvor- ship is not an inheritance or succession, nevertheless the death of the decedent ordinarily makes the survivor the sole and undisputed owner. Such death enlarges, in practical effect, the quantity of his estate, for up to the death of the deceased joint owner it was within his power to have changed the joint estate to a tenancy in common, and hence death, from this point of view, is the generating source which consummates the joint estate in its full plentitude. But this theory is not wholly convincing or satisfact- ory, and, like the attempt to tax insurance and dower, rests on an implied assumption which does not stand the test oE analysis. The attempt to tax such interest may be criticized as perhaps an unwise extension of inheritance taxation to objects properly beyond Its reason- able scope. In addition to the Federal Govern- ment most of the states have a specific statutory L I . . Hon. Robert S. Calvert Page 4 Opinion No. WW-262 provision making the vesting of joint es- tates by right of survivorship taxable. A number of states have no statutory provi- sions, and in most of these joint estates are not taxed, but in South Dakota, prior to the adoptlon of a specific provision taxing as to jointly held property, the taxing authorities taxed such interest as a matter of general constructfon. The soundness of such a construction is possibly open to doubt," You are therefore advised that no Inheritance tax accrued when the surviving sisters succeeded re- spectively to l/2 of the deceased sister's interest. SUMMARY The surviving joint tenants do not owe any inheritance tax upon the interest received at the death of a joint tenant. Yours very truly WILL WILSON Attorney General MMP/fb APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE: George P. Blackburn, Chairman Ralph Rash Wm. R. Hemphfll REVIEWFDFORTHEA'Pl'GRNEYGENF.RAL By: James N.Ludlum