-
Honorable George R. Sheppard Comptroller of Public Accounts Austin, Texas Dear Sir: Opinion No. o-6984 Re: Classification of step-mother of decedent for inheritance tax purposes. Your request for opinion on the captioned subject has been given careful consideration by this department. The facts stated therein are, briefly, as follows: Decedent left a will by which he devised his entire estate to his step-mother. The attorney for the devise Is contending that she should be placed in Class A, as defined In Article 7118, instead of In Class E, as defined In Article 7122, as Is contended by you. Article 7117 subjects all property passing by will or by the laws of descent and distribution to an inheritance tax in accordance with the classification set out in Articles 7118 to 7122. Article 7118, so far as pertinent hereto, reads as fol- lows: 'Class A. Husband or wife or their descendants or ascendants -- If passing to or for the use of husband or wife, or any direct lineal descendant of husband or wife, or any direct lineal descendant or ascendant of the decedent, or to any legally adopted child or children of the decedent, or to the husband of a daughter, or the wife of a son, the tax shall be one (1) per cent on any value in excess of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), and not excee$ing Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00); o * a . . e 0 (Emphasis added) A step-mother Is not a direct lineal descendant or ascen- dant of the decedent, nor is she Included within any of the other groups enumerated in the statute. The words "direct descendant" and lineal descendant" have clearly defined meanlngs in law. Vol, 12, Words & Phrases 467; Vol. 25 Words & Phrases 31qa The term "ascendant" has had less judicial treatment, but since it is an antonym of *descendant" the same rules for determining the relatlonshlp would apply. It is synonymous with "ancestor. Honorable George R. Sheppard, page 2 o-6984 The word "ancestor" has been held to Include parents, grand- parents, and all persons in the ascending w as far as rela- tion can be traced. Mitchell v. Thorne,
32 N.E. 10,
134 N.Y. 536, 30 Am. St. Rep, 699. Under a statute providing that children are bound to support ascendants who are in need, it was held that a son must maintain his needy mother, since she was an "ascendant in need." Tolley v. Earcher,
196 La. 685,
200 So. 4. In all instances found, dealing with either the term "ancestor" or “ascendant”, the courts required that there be some blood relatlonship between the parties. There is none in the case of``astep-mother, and therefore she cannot be placed in Class A as defined in Article 7118. Article 7122 provides: "If the passing to or for the use of the United States........OP to any other person... .....not included.in any of the classes men- tioned In the preceding portions of the ori- ginal Act......,the tax shall be: 5% on any value in excess of $500 and not exceeding $lO,OOO...........", etc. It Is our opinion that the beneficiary in question is such "other person"'referred to in Article 7122, and is subject to the provisions thereof. Yours very truly ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS By Arthur L. Moller (8) Arthur L. Moller Assistant ALM:vwb:wc APPROVED DEC 18, 1945 s/Grover Sellers ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS Approved Opinion Commlttee By s/GWB Chairman
Document Info
Docket Number: O-6984
Judges: Grover Sellers
Filed Date: 7/2/1946
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017