Skip to main content

Whether a Parcel of Land is Conjugal or Personal Property for Estate Tax Purposes

BIR Ruling No. 130-98 • Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Issuances • Rulings (Numbered) • Sep 10, 1998

Full text

September 10, 1998 BIR RULING NO. 130-98 85 (H)-000-00-130-98 Atty. Dioscoro C. Peligro Royal Tower, 4474 Singin Street Makati City S i r : This refers to your letter dated June 22, 1998 requesting for a ruling as to whether or not a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 131641 located at Bangkal, Makati City is conjugal or personal property for estate tax purposes. It is represented that the said land was originally registered in the name of Ricardo C. Samano under TCT No. 18904; that in a Memorandum of Agreement dated May 8, 1984, the owner Ricardo C. Samano, gave the said parcel of land to her sister, Luz S. Espiritu, who was at that time married to Perfecto Espiritu; that subsequently, TCT No. 18904 in the name of Ricardo C. Samano was cancelled and another title was issued in the name of Luz Espiritu under TCT No. 131641 married to Perfecto Espiritu; and that on November 5, 1995, Perfecto Espiritu died. In reply, please be informed that since the aforestated parcel of land covered by TCT No. 131641 was acquired by Mrs. Luz S. Espiritu during her marriage with Perfecto Espiritu by gratuitous title, the same, having been donated to her alone by her brother, Ricardo C. Samano, in consideration of his love and affection for being the youngest and only sister, shall be considered as the exclusive property of Luz S. Espiritu (Sec. 5(f)(2), Revenue Regulations No. 17-93 dated August 30, 1993). Such being the case, the same shall not be deemed a part of the gross estate of the deceased Perfecto Espiritu for estate tax purposes, pursuant to Section 78(h) of the Tax Code, as restructured by Republic Act No. 7499 (now Section 85(H) of the Tax Code of 1997). This ruling is being issued on the basis of the foregoing facts as represented. However, if upon investigation it will be disclosed that the facts are different, then this ruling shall be considered null and void. Very truly yours, (SGD.) BEETHOVEN L. RUALO Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Ask what this means for your situation

The assistant quotes the passage it relies on and links the source, so you can check every figure it gives you.