Opinion ID: 1948783
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: minimization of taxes

Text: It is argued that Mr. Ericson was uninterested in minimizing taxes, because he never discussed the subject. This conclusion is not justified. Every testator is entitled to assume, absent evidence to the contrary, that his lawyer will undertake to accomplish his testamentary wishes with as little tax impact as possible. Furthermore, it is normally and quite rationally presumed that this is what the testator wishes. Any other belief, absent evidence to support it, is fatuous. The will itself shows every indication that taxes were to be minimized. Article IV, 1.(a) states, as we have noted above, that the testator sets aside as his wife's marital share, that fraction of my entire residuary estate which shall secure for my estate the maximum marital deduction allowable under the Federal Estate tax law. The provision of the will immediately following the marital deduction clause directs that only qualified assets shall be allocated to the marital share, thus insuring that the deduction will not be reduced by the inclusion of non-qualified property. Article II seeks to immunize the marital share from the payment of all death duties. While, as mentioned above, this latter provision results in avoiding any diminution of the marital share that would result were it to bear any part of the tax burden, at the same time it improves the overall tax picture by maintaining the marital deduction at its maximum amount.