BAR REPORT - Capitol Report
The NJSBA argued in a trio of amicus cases on Sept. 12. This is the first installment of coverage.
September 17, 2018 at 08:00 AM
4 minute read
NJSBA is a Friend of the Court in Inheritance Tax Case
Editor's note: The NJSBA argued in a trio of amicus cases on Sept. 12. This is the first installment of coverage. An upcoming edition of the Capitol Report will dive into the arguments made before the New Jersey Supreme Court in State v. Eileen Cassidy and Amanda Kernahan v. Home Warranty Administrator of Florida, Inc. and Choice Home Warranty.
A hot Appellate Division bench last week questioned the propriety of the treatment of inheritance tax transfers made in contemplation of death. In Estate of Mary Van Riper v. NJ Division of Taxation, Docket No. 8196-2916, the Appellate Division will consider whether the inheritance tax imposed on the entire value of a life estate upon the death of one party's interest in the estate is permissible. The New Jersey State Bar Association objected to that application in its amicus curiae brief. The brief was written by Andrew J. DeMaio, Glenn A. Henkel, Jill Liebowitz and Heather G. Suarez, members of the NJSBA's Real Property, Trust and Estates Law Section. DeMaio argued the matter on behalf of the NJSBA.
The association argued that that the transfer of an asset to a trust was a taxable event, becoming due when a spouse died. DeMaio argued that the transfer is 50 percent of the value of the estate and not the entire value, as is the interest in the designation of ownership as a joint tenant by the entirety. “We deal with this all the time administratively,” said DeMaio, pointing out that the state issues guidelines as to how to calculate a compromise tax for transfers that pass to the contingent beneficiary of such a trust. He argued that to treat both transfers as 100 percent would create a legal fiction that an estate is a 200 percent interest.
The matter stems from the creation of an irrevocable trust by the Van Ripers, to which they transferred all of their interests in their residence. Later that same month, Walter Van Riper died, and his 50 percent ownership interest was reported on a New Jersey inheritance tax return. All of the assets owned individually by him and jointly with his wife, Mary, were also reported on the return. Mary died six years later, and the assets of the trust passed, pursuant to the terms of the trust, to her niece. When the estate tax return was completed, the trustee deemed the trust not taxable and filed the taxes showing a zero tax liability. The Division of Tax disagreed, deeming the full date-of-death value of the residence as taxable.
The NJSBA drew comparisons with other statutes, such as N.J.S.A. 54:3A-17d, providing that married taxpayers who own entireties of real estate and file separate New Jersey tax returns are entitled to deduct only half of the taxes paid. Married spouses are also permitted to disclaim an interest passing by survivorship.
The court questioned the NJSBA's assertion that this could upend well-settled practice in the area and challenged counsel to respond to questions on how their position can be reconciled with well-settled case law dating back to the 1800's.
Citing to the new Uniform Trust Code adopted in New Jersey, Van Riper's attorney argued that “trusts ought to mean something” and that a transfer to a trust, in essence, destroys a tenancy by the entirety. He drew comparisons to the federal gift tax law, pointing out that New Jersey does not have such a law.
The NJSBA cautioned the court that a ruling permitting the imposition of inheritance taxes on the basis of the decedent's mere possession of an interest at death, in the absence of prior ownership and retained by the decedent, is unprecedented in New Jersey. The association pointed out that the tax court's holding would result in the taxation of transfers that have never before been the subject of the inheritance tax.
Also filing an amicus curiae brief was the Land Title Association. Ed Eastman, an NJSBA member, which argued their support of NJSBA's proposed treatment of the tax.
This is a status report provided by the New Jersey State Bar Association on recently passed and pending legislation, regulations, gubernatorial nominations and/or appointments of interest to lawyers, as well as the involvement of the NJSBA as amicus in appellate court matters. To learn more, visit njsba.com.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNew Methods for Clients and Families to Have Their Estate and Legacy Planning Complete
5 minute readTensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
4 minute readAppreciating the Important Work the Middlesex County Civil Bar Panel Does
7 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250