About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


67 UCLA L. Rev. Discourse 1 (2019)

handle is hein.journals/ucladis67 and id is 1 raw text is: The Supreme Court, Due Process and State Income Taxation of Trusts Bridget J. Crawford and Michelle S. Simon ABSTRACT What are the constitutional limits on a state's power to tax a trust with no connection to the state, other than the accident that a potential beneficiary lives there? The Supreme Court of the United States will take up this question this term in the context of North Carolina Department of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust. The case involves North Carolina's income taxation of a trust with a contingent beneficiary, meaning someone who is eligible, but not certain, to receive a distribution or benefit from the trust, who resides in that state. Part I of this Article explains the background of Kaestner Trust and frames the constitutional questions that will be before the Court at oral arguments on April 16, 2019. Part II examines how and why due process applies in the state income taxation context, with a particular emphasis on how familiar concepts of general and specific jurisdiction apply uneasily to donative trusts. Part III articulates the reasons that the Court should hold that a state has no constitutional authority to impose a tax on trust income where the trust's only connection with the forum state is the residence of a contingent beneficiary. Kaestner Trust is the most important due process case involving trusts that the Court has decided in over sixty years; it bears directly on the fundamental meaning of due process. AUTHORS Bridget Crawford is the James D. Hopkins Professor of Law at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University. Michelle Simon is a Professor of Law and the Dean Emerita of the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University. 67 UCLA L. REv. Disc. 2 (2019)