Three reasons
144kb

On June 11, 1992, the accountants requested an extension for filing the estate tax return (IRS Form 4768) that was originally due on June 15, 1992. The three reasons given on the $175,000* version were:

From IRS Form 4768, Part II Extension of time to file

1. The decedent was a part owner of a tract of ground the value of which is to be determined by an [1] appraisal in progress. The enclosed payment is based on the maximum value for the property and will be changed.

2. The estate does not at this date possess full data for certain [2] gifts and [3] debts of the estate and other needed information."

Does it look as if the accountants use one innocent family member to frame another family member to make it appear that the family, rather than the accountants, is responsible for the delay of the estate tax return? The original due date for the estate tax return is June 15, 1992.

*There are two versions of the extension request (IRS Form 4768) and two version of the estate tax return (IRS Form 760) with the same dates but for different amounts. One version says $175,000 was paid to the IRS on June 11, 1992, and one version says i$119,000 was paid to the IRS on June 11, 1992. There should only be one version. The $70,051 over payment reported on the $175,000 version disappears from the accounting.
Does anyone know a journalist with a background in accounting who would do whatever it takes to expose the accounting trails of the CPA Joanne Barnes and the Attorney Edward White at Book 467 page 191 (pdf) in the public record and find out where the money went? Missing $70,051. And warn other families of the accountant's methods?

Appraisal

1992.02.18 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader)
"Re: Estate of Jean M. O'Connell,
Dear Mr. O'Connell,
In order to prepare your mother's 1991 income tax returns, I need the amount that the Harold O'Connell Trust paid her during 1991. In the event the payment was not made in 1991, I will need to file the amount which was due as "income with respect to a decedent" on the estate tax and fiduciary tax returns. The cutoff date for your computation will be September 15, 1991. After that date the trust technically terminated, and the income belongs to the beneficiaries of that trust.
Jean and I are making progress on the estate. We have decided to leave the A. G. Edwards accounts in place since they are earning a better rate of return than a bank can give.
I am trying to get to the bottom of the car problem with Sovran and should be able to get the title soon so that it can be transferred to you before the insurance expires.
Jean has informed me that you and your sisters have decided that it is best to try and list the Accotink property at its actual value as of the of death rather than a higher value based on its future value. Since you have worked so diligently on this problem in the past, could you give me the name of an appraiser who could do a valuation which will take into account all of the county inspired problems. It seems to me that the county value of $600,000.00 is too high based on the hurdles you have run into in trying to develop it.
Could you also send me the address of Lynch Properties?
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

Note: The Lynch payment of $545,820 to the Estate on April 21, 1992, is not mentioned and does not show in the accountings. Does anyone know a journalist with a background in accounting who would do whatever it takes to expose the accounting trails of the CPA Joanne Barnes and the Attorney Edward White at Book 467 page 191 (pdf) in the public record and find out where the money went? Missing $70,051. And warn other families of the accountant's methods?

1992.04.22 (leaked) (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"Enclosed is an agreement which should satisfy Tony as to the car. It cannot be any clearer.
Also enclosed is a preliminary analysis of the estate tax, which should be close to being accurate. I do need to check with Jo Ann Barnes as to a technical question as to whether or not any of your father's trust comes into this. I do not think it does, but there have been many changes in the law since that trust was established. I will have to ask her to bill us for that advice and any other technical tax matters I am not comfortable with. I can do most of the rest of the tax work and save the estate some money.
The executors' commission shown on the analysis is not figured on the value of the realty; however it does not include the 5% commission on the receipts of the estate in addition to the inventory.
[Debts (coming)] In order to file that return and the subsequent Fiduciary Income tax return we will need an accounting from Tony from the date of his last accounting to the date of death. If he does not want to prepare it, I will not agree to any preliminary disbursal to him at all, and will seek your approval to file suit against him to compel the accounting, plus damages to the estate for his delay. Since that trust terminated on your mother's death, his final accounting is due now and not in October.
There will be no further explanations or written entreaties to him as far as I am concerned. He has the duty and he will perform it under a court order if necessary. Of course he will furnish that receipt.
[Appraisal] The preliminary analysis contains three alternatives on Accotink at the bottom for your consideration.
In the event that we do seek a reduction in the assessment Tony will be given written notice that his prompt cooperation is necessary and that if he fails to cooperate that he is aware of the adverse consequences to the estate and is responsible for them.
As far as further steps are concerned, we have a lot to do. [Gifts] No gift tax returns were filed for 1989 and 1991 which will have to be done. The results of those gifts are factored in under "Unified Credit used for gifts 9,784".
The paper trail in the court and IRS is as follows:
File Estate tax by June 15, 1992
File First Accounting (16 months after qualification but can be sooner)
Ask for posting of Debts and Demands against the estate.
File Fiduciary Income tax returns for period 9/15/91-9/15/92, due January 1, 1993.
File Motion for a Show Cause why distribution should not be made. Submit Show Cause Order.
Request Executor's exoneration letter from IRS and Virginia.
Obtain closing letter from IRS and Virginia as to estate tax returns.
File 1993 Fiduciary tax returns (Sept. 1992-distribution)
File for Order allowing distribution.
Distribute estate.
File Final Accounting.
Normally distribution is withheld until the Order of Distribution is entered. As I indicated the creditors have one year to press claims against the estate. No prudent executor will distribute before that period, the entry of the Order of Distribution and the receipt of the tax closing letters.
Sincerely, Edward J. White

Enclosures:
(1) "Cash(?), Notes, Stocks & Bonds
      "Detail: "Debt from Harold O'Connell Trust   659.97"
(2) "Tax computation" (Accotink reassessment)
(3) "AGREEMENT CONFIRMING DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE
We, Jean M. Nader and Sheila O'Connell-Shevenell, hereby confirm that one 1988 Plymouth Van was distributed to our brother, Anthony M. O'Connell by the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell, and that we hereby confirm and agree to that distribution. We further confirm and agree that this distribution shall not be charged against Anthony M. O'Connell's share of the estate and that the remaining net proceeds of the estate after settlement of all debts and obligations shall be divided in three equal shares.
DATE: May 1, 1992
*_____              *_____
Jean M. Nader (seal)        Sheila O'Connell (seal)"

1992.05.04 (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"[Appraisal] Enclosed is the form for appealing the tax assessment of the Accotink property. On page 2, it states that there is a June 1 deadline. I do not think we can make a claim of a lesser value on the estate tax return if we do not file an appeal with the county. To fail do appeal it would hurt our argument with the IRS.
The summary of the estate tax computation and the interplay of the gift tax is as follows: 1. In computing the estate tax, the gross estate (which includes anything which passes due to death whether in the probate estate or not) is figured, the debts subtracted and the "taxable estate" is ascertained.
2. The tax is then computed on the taxable estate. From this figure is subtracted a "unified credit" of $192,800 (equivalent to a taxable estate of $600,000).
3. Lifetime gifts in excess of $10,000 to any one individual are taxable at the estate/gift tax rates. Each year the donor should have filed a gift tax return, though no Lax is due unless the entire $192,800 credit has been used in making the gifts.
4. Each gift over $10,000 uses a portion of the unified credit, thus reducing the amount of that credit available to apply to the estate tax.
In our case the lifetime gifts used up $9784.00 of the available credit. A list of the gifts is enclosed. Returns for 1989 and 1991 must be filed. As fiduciaries we must certify to the IRS that the return is true and correct. We have personal liability in that regard. If we have knowledge of a gift to Tony of $15,000, we must report it. [Gifts] Tony is going to have to answer that question before we can be satisfied. If he claims he did not receive the money, he will have to supply us with an affidavit to that effect.
As far as the management of an estate undergoing the probate process is concerned, the Executors are entitled to some latitude within the confines of their fiduciary duty. The decisions about the estate are theirs.
My personal operational mode in these matters is to keep the heirs fully supplied with the paperwork of the estate, and consult with them fully as to strategic and long range issues, such as the valuation of property in the Accotink situation. The day to day matters and the justification for tactical positions taken such as the contents of forms and accountings are the prerogative of the Executors and subject to the scrutiny and approval of the Commissioner of Accounts or the taxing authorities only. [Debts (using K-1 coming)] With regard to the filing of the income tax return, my file indicates that I received a fax copy of the K-1 from the Harold O'Connell Trust on April 9, 1992, only six days before the tax return was due.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.05.07 (Jean Nader to Anthony O Connell)
"May 7
Dear Tony
Enclosed is an application for Revision of Real Property Assessment.
Mr. White and I feel that it is in the best interest of you, Sheila and to have the $600,000 value of Accotink lowered, perhaps to 300,000 or 400,000. The bottom line for the beneficiaries of the estate is to receive the most money possible.
Our thinking includes these reasons.

Accotink is suffering bad real estate times.
Accotink is lacking good access.
Accotink is not receiving an income.
Accotink s assessment tax has been raised to $1.25 per - Accotink s tax bill will be in the neighborhood of $7,000 per year.
Accotink is 1/3 wet land 1/3 clay land 1/3 good land
When Accotink does have a buyer the land can be appraised
This appeal saves the estate 7500 for an appraiser - You are by far the most qualified to do this form and represent the property. This form is due June 1st 1992 not "no deadline" as appears on the blue form. I have also enclosed a copy of the form to use as a work sheet. If you decide to do this for the benefit of you and I and Sheila. Please send each of us a copy.
Thanking you for your consideration - Love Jean
The answers to your questions
1. Yes, you have a copy of the original tax form even though it is not dated nor signed.
2. We are applying for "waiver of penalty request - because -
  a. It took me several weeks to go through the many boxes you left here. I did find important papers. If I had had those boxes in the fall it would have helped -
  b. The April 9 receipt of K-1 from the "trust" through FAX
  c. Finding the Washington Gas & Light -
  d. Still looking for Nuveen stock certificate - now we are assuming it s lost and going through paper work with Nuveen to receive the certificates
  e. Getting info to complete the final accounting"

Enclosures:
Attachment 1: County form "Application for Revision of Real Property Assessment".
Attachment 2: Letter from Vivian Watts to Anthony O'Connell, September 14, 1987.
Attachment 3: Letter from Anthony O'Connell to A. V. Bailey II, August 3, 1987.
Attachment 4: Tax map with additions

1992.05.12 (Anthony O'Connell to Jean Nader)
"I am returning to you the reassessment applications I received yesterday with the June 1, 1992, deadline. I would not touch this with a ten foot pole for fear of Mr. White convincing you to sue me for something. I talked to my zoning attorney this morning. He advised me that asking for a lower assessment would not interfere with future plans for Accotink. The appraiser he recommended estimated the very detailed kind of appraisal that goes to the IRS would cost about $2,000. He could probably have it by the end of the month. I want to solve the problem. Because $2,000.00 is a reasonable figure rather than the $7,000.00 to $7,500.00 for the appraiser recommended by Mr. White {Who would not be available until October of 1992?}, I hired this appraiser and will pay for it out of the trust if necessary. However, it would save the beneficiaries about $800 if it were paid out of the estate because of the estate tax. To me it is not worth a fight. If you would like to solve problems in which you want information from me, please give me a list now so that I can plan for it. Please, no more surprise requirements and deadlines."

1992.05.13 (Anthony O'Connell to Tom Reed (Appraiser))
"Nice to talk to you yesterday. I am very happy that you can do this by the end of the month. The information you requested is enclosed. I would appreciate it if you would return it to me after you are through.
1. Site Plan 7818-SP-03-3 which has been on hold in the Fairfax County Bond Office since November of 1989 or 1990. It is, of course, not recorded. I have been advised that the developer has officially applied for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
2. Sewer easement of 1965. Later an additional smaller sewer was added from the east that connects to it perpendicularly. You can see it on the above mentioned site plan.
3. Survey in 1953 by Joseph Berry that was never recorded. I have never been able to get any backup information on this from the existing company that grew out of Joseph Berry.
4. Letter from the Secretary of Transportation, Vivian E. Watts, stating that there is no legal access to 890-4-001-17. Some of the tax maps show Cinder Bed Road as a solid line to parcel 17, but this is in error.
5. Developer's application RZ-86-L-073 of August 23, 1989, with Staff report addendum of September 1, 1989, and September 12, 1989. As you can see, there is extensive Marine clay, steep slopes and EQC in and on parcel 17.
If there is any other information that you might think helpful, please do not hesitate to call. Please send the bill and appraisal to me. Thank you very much."

1992.05.14 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader)
'The enclosed letter of this date was written and about to be mailed when I received your letter to Jean of May 12 "Reference Accotink" etc.
In you previous letter you used the phrase "protect me from Mr. White". In this letter you state: "I would not touch this with
a ten foot pole for fear of Mr. White convincing you to sue me for something." I do get a little disturbed at this continuing tone.
I do not know how on earth I can convince you that I bear you no animosity and have absolutely no idea nor desire whatsoever of causing you any harm.
As far as Accotink is concerned, as you have noted I am not a beneficiary and I am not involved in the trust which existed prior to your mother's death, and I have no personal interest at all in it.
I have put forward suggestions that might make the receipt of this property more profitable for the three of you. I have done that only out of a desire for the best financial interests of each of you. I do not get paid a cent extra for the time I have expended in this regard. Whatever decision the three of you make
is fine with me. I only brought you into this matter at all, having been aware of the superb efforts you have made in the past to make this property a worthwhile venture.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.05.19 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, c/o E.A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader)
"In your letter of May 6 to Jean you asked that I communicate with you with regard to the Harold O'Connell Trust.
I am trying to prepare the estate tax, and as usual in these cases, there are problems trying to understand the flow of debts and income.
I do have a few questions which are put forward simply so that the figures on the Trust's tax returns and accounting will agree with the estate's.
1. The K-1 filed by the Trust for 1991 showed income to your mother of $41,446.00. The Seventh Accounting appears to show a disbursement to her of $40,000.00 plus first half realty taxes paid by the trust for her and thus a disbursal to her of $1794.89. If these two disbursals are added the sum is $41,794.89. This leaves $348.89 which I cannot figure out. It could well be a disbursal of principal and not taxable.
2. The K-1 filed by the Trust showed a payment of $816.00 in interest to the estate. You sent a check in the amount of $1475.97 to the estate. What was the remaining $659.97? Do I have this confused with the tax debt/credit situation which ran from the Third Accounting?
3. On the Seventh Accounting "Income per 7th Account" is shown as $5181.71, but I cannot figure that one out either.
I am of the opinion that the estate owes the trust for the second half real estate taxes from September 15, 1991 through December 31, 1991 in the amount of $1052.35. This is shown on your accounting a disbursed to the heirs. Should this be paid back to the heirs or to the Trust?
I believe that the income received from the savings accounts from September 15 to the date the various banks made their next payment to the Trust (9/30 and 9/21) should be split on a per diem basis, since the Trust terminated on her death. This will be a small amount of course.
Are there any other debts which your Mother owed the Trust?
I realize that Jo Ann Barnes prepared this and if you authorize it I can ask her to help me out.
Please understand that I have no problem with the Accounting, I m just trying to match things up. In the long run, since the beneficiaries are the same, the matter is academic. Please send the bill for the appraisal whenever you receive it. Jean is filing the Fairfax form for re-assessment in her capacity as a co-owner in order to give us a better basis to get this assessment changed and to meet the county's deadline. It will state that the appraisal you have ordered will follow. I think this will be to all of your benefit in the long run.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.06.03+ (Jean Nader to Anthony O Connell)
"Tony - This came today and I made copies - Have a good day - Love Jean"
(This is on the following letter:
1992.06.03 (Thomas Dittmer, County of Fairfax, to Jean Nader)
"We have received your request for revision of real property assessment on the following property: Map reference 90-4-(111))-17 Legal description Accotink Station
An investiagtion will be made of this assessment bt a representative from this office, and you will be notified of out conclusion in the near future")

1992.06.05 (Estimated) (Jean Nader to Anthony O Connell)
"Dear Tony -
The beach and being with Amy, Jen and friends was wonderful - Time passed too quickly - You probably have the same feeling when you are on your Highland County property.
I certainly enjoyed seeing you and meeting Linda. I thought Mother s dedication was very nice and I thought the garden looked beautiful. I m glad were also able to talk about Accotink and make some decisions about the appraiser.
Springfield must be lovely at this time
Love Jean
Personal Questions from me -
pertaining to your accounting of the trust.

Does the trust now own a computer and if so why - ?
Why was a compass bought - ?
Why isn t this a final accounting? I understand from Mr. Prichard in Sept that (at?) Mother s death the trust ended. Please understand that I am asking questions for info. They were questions that went through my mind as I read the account.

I know how you like things in writing. You asked me 5 - 14- 92 if I trusted Ed White. In fact you asked me twice, At the time of the question we were discussing the estate. I answered the question. Yes.
I probably should have said yes. In matters of Jean O Connell s estate, I have had no instance not to trust him. I confer with my lawyer here and Ed White s advice and ????? of following the execution of Mother s will are correct.
I hope this makes my answers clear.
In the estate there is a CD to me. POD from Mother. I found it in the boxes you left here. I also received an IRS form for it. There were no other CD papers "still - in -use" in the boxes. I have the money deposited in my sayings account.
Love Jean
When will your appraiser do his appraisal - ? If it s before June 15th will his findings be available for the June 15th filing?
Thank you."

1992.06.09 (Anthony O'Connell to Jean Nader, Edward White)
"Enclosed is the appraisal of Accotink, indicating a value of $300,000.00. The cost of the appraisal was $2,000.00 and was paid for by the trust. Jean, thank you for sending me a copy of the reassessment form you sent to Fairfax County. I noticed you used my letters of August 3, 1987, of September 14, 1987, and a tax map to document that Cinder Bed Road is not maintained. This documentation implies Cinder Bed Road is a legal access to Accotink. I thought this also until I received a response to the September letter from the Secretary of Transportation, a copy of which was included in the Accotink file I sent to you. This letter is very significant. It invalidates the documentation. The county road map is incorrect. The tax map showing solid lines for Cinder Bed Road all the way to our parcel is incorrect. Cinder Bed Road stops short of it, something like half a mile short. There is no legal access to Accotink. I think this is a very big factor in applying for reassessment. It is also the sole justification for getting a public road access through the planned development to the east. If we don't get this access, our property will be of little value. Personally, I would recommend that you make it clear to the county that there is at this time no legal access. I do not want to hurt your feelings. I feel you and all concerned should know the situation. I feel how Accotink is managed from here on out will very significantly effect its value. If there is any future correspondence concerning Accotink that you might like me to review, I would be happy to do so. Thank you for the nice letter I received from you today."

1992.06.11 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell)
'Thank you very much for your letter of June 9 and the appraisal.
I am helping Jean with the county matter and would appreciate your assistance since you certainly have much more expertise in the Accotink affair than anyone else. I agree that we must amplify the material previously sent to the county, and that the letter you enclosed is most pertinent. I had copies you sent me several years ago of the 1987 letters you wrote and received, but did not have the October letter.
Enclosed is a proposed addendum for the county which I wish you would look over, edit and add any comments that you think we should make. I am sure there are many factors that I have missed that you can add and welcome your input.

DRAFT (enclosure to the above)
"Omitted from the previously submitted appeal was a copy of a letter from the Secretary of Transportation, dated October 13, 1987 in reply to Mr. Anthony O'Connell's letter to her of September 14, 1987 (a copy of which was attached to the appeal). Mrs. Watts' reply makes quite clear that the county map of Cinderbed Road is in error. The road begins at Newington Road and continues for only 1.0 miles, not 1.5 miles. The O'Connell tract lies one half mile beyond the end of Cinderbed Road and therefore there is no legal access at all to this property. This is an extremely important factor in justifying a reassessment of the property. In addition, a full appraisal of the property by Thomas E. Reed has just been received setting a fair market value of $300,000.00 on the tract. This appraisal notes that one third of the property lies in a flood plain, that the soil conditions are only rated "fair" for residential development and that the terrain is steep and rugged in places. Mr. Reed is of the opinion that the only potential of the property would be to combine it with the 245 acre Hunter Tract to the south; He notes that the development of that project is apparently on hold due to economic factors. Attached are extracts of the pertinent part of the report. The entire document is available and a full copy can be delivered to you upon request.

1992.06.11 (Edward White on IRS form 4768 "Extension on time to file", which is sent to the IRS, and here, to the Virginia Department of Taxation)
"Enclosed is a copy of IRS Form 4768 with attachment and the Estate's check in the amount of $31,000.00. An extension of the filing date is requested."
(Copy below)
"Form 4768 Extension of time to file
Estate of Jean M. O'Connell

From IRS Form 4768, Part II Extension of time to file:

"1. The decedent was a part owner of a tract of ground the value of which is to be determined by an appraisal in progress. The enclosed payment is based on the maximum value for the property and will be changed.

2. The estate does not at this date possess full data for certain gifts and debts of the estate and other needed information."

Note: There are two versions of the extension request (IRS Form 4768) and two version of the estate tax return (IRS Form 760) with the same dates but for different amounts. One version says $175,000 was paid to the IRS on June 11, 1992, and one version says i$119,000 was paid to the IRS on June 11, 1992. There should only be one version. The $70,051 over payment reported on the $175,000 version disappears from the accounting.
Does anyone know a journalist with a background in accounting who would do whatever it takes to expose the accounting trails of the CPA Joanne Barnes and the Attorney Edward White at Book 467 page 191 (pdf) in the public record and find out where the money went? Missing $70,051. And warn other families of the accountant's methods?

1992.06.15 Original due date for estate tax return (IRS Form 760)

1992.06.25 (Anthony O'Connell to Thomas Dittmer) (Copies to Thomas Reed, E. A. Prichard, Edward White, Jean Nader, and Sheila O'Connell)
"As promised in the previously submitted appeal for reassessment, a detailed professional appraisal of 90-4-001-17 is enclosed. The appraiser, Mr. Thomas E. Reed, places a value of $300,000.00 on the property. The enclosed Fairfax County soil evaluation report states that 49% of parcel 17 is flood plain, 37% of it is marine clay and only the remaining 14% is good for building. It is my personal belief that if I had made this special soil report available to the appraiser, it probably would have justified an assessed value significantly below $300,000.00. The appraiser can be reached at (703) 591-3739. Also enclosed is a copy of an October 13, 1987, letter from the Secretary of Transportation. As you can see, Ms. Watts' states that the present mapping of Cinder Bed Road is in error. Contrary to the present County tax map 90-4, Cinder Bed Road does not extend to parcel 17, but ends .49 miles short of our property. Consequently, there is no legal access to parcel 17. I believe the county tax maps published prior to 1967 will verify this. In short, parcel 17 is legally and functionally landlocked. It is my personal belief that the existing $600,000.00 assessment was, in part, innocently and unknowingly based on this mapping error. If there is any confusion on this point, please call me at (703) 971-2855 and I will provide any information that you might think helpful. Thank you for reconsidering the assessment. I would like to be present at the time of inspection.

1992.06.30 (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"Enclosed are: Virginia and IRS amended 1991 tax returns to be signed and mailed, letters to the IRS and Virginia, checks for each, and gift tax returns for 1989 and 1991 to be to be signed and mailed.
I will pay any interest and penalty which accrues on the amended tax return. The amount reflects the tax on the $125,188.17 principal payment made on the Lynch note in the Spring of 1991.
I never heard from Tony after my letter asking his input on the real estate tax matter. I gather from his letter to Fairfax County that he is taking it over which is fine with me.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.07.27 (Estimated) (Jean Nader to Anthony O Connell)
[Typed below]
"1. What is the status of the Fairfax County re-assessment matter?
2. Are you handling it?
3. You mentioned that you have brought to the Board's attention the fact that the appraisal did not factor in the marine clay issue. Can the appraiser amend his report to reflect a lower value so that it can be used on the estate tax return.?
5. Since the trust was supposed to terminate on Mother's death, the $2000.00 for the appraisal should be paid to the beneficiaries, not to the trust. The checks from Sheila and me can then be paid back to you.
6. Please send a copy of the appraiser's bill and his notation that it has been paid so that the estate may claim the payment for the appraisal as a deduction.
[Handwritten below]
..... Will you answer the enclosed questions? Either to Ed White or me -
Love Jean"

1992.07.30 (Anthony O'Connell to Jean Nader):
"Thank you for your letter. I will do my best to answer your questions.
1. I do not know the status of the Fairfax County reassessment.
2. I am not handling Accotink. If you and Sheila would like me to handle Accotink, I will. I have sent you a copy of anything I did do concerning the reassessment.
3. You could call the appraiser, Mr. Thomas Reed at (703) 591-3739, and ask him. As you know, the down side of getting an even lower basis on the property is that you, Sheila and I will have to pay a greater capital gains tax on our personal returns when Accotink is sold.
5. I am not sure I understand this. Would you elaborate on it or give me the source of your information so I can check it out? I believe the appropriate method for reimbursing the trust for a service the trust provided to the estate is for the estate to reimburse the trust. The trust account is open.
6. A copy of the appraiser's bill with his notation that it has been paid and a copy of the canceled check is enclosed. Please have the estate send me a check made out to the trust in the amount of $2,000.00.
Comments :
A. If you call the Commissioner of Accounts Office at (703) 385-
0268, I believe they will tell you that it is normal procedure for a trust to remain open until all the money that should go in to the trust is received and that there should be sufficient money in the trust to pay for necessary expenses until that time. For example, the trust will get a 1992 tax refund from the IRS and from Virginia. If I terminate the trust before these checks arrive I would have to reopen the trust in order for those checks to be cashed and distributed to the beneficiares.
B. The trust assets as of 1/1/91 were $620,207.90.
Accotink       $ 34,574.55
Lynch note    535,346.51
Cash                50,286.51
           Total $620,207.90
Of this $620,207.90, Accotink, which I understand passed directly to the beneficiaries at mother's death, accounted for $34,574.55. So $620,207.90 -$34,574.55 leaves $585,633.35 in cash and the Lynch note.
Distributions of this $585,633.35 to date are as follows:
(This part of lines and columns of numbers is not included here)
Ninety-seven and one third percent (97.33%) of the trust assets have been distributed. The big jump in distribution on 4/21/92 resulted from the Lynch paying off the entirety of the note on 4/21/92. I felt it would have been impractical to distribute the note to the three beneficiaries prior to 4/21/92.
C. As trustee, I have a favor to ask you. If you feel I have done something I shouldn't have or didn't do something I should have, would you please tell me exactly what it is? I would appreciate it if you would be very specific."

1992.09.03 (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"Enclosed are the federal and state estate tax returns to be signed at the bottom of the first page of each and mailed.
The Federal return (with the Reed appraisal) goes to IRS,
Philadelphia, Pa. 19255.
The Virginia return goes to:
Virginia Department of Taxation
Processing Services Division
P. 0. BOX 6-L
Richmond, Va. 23282
Also enclosed are checks in the amount of $33,000.00 each.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"
(hand written by Edward White at the bottom: P. S. Please send copies to Tony and Sheila)
(hand written by Jean Nader at the bottom: Here's a copy of the final estate filling -Love Jean)
(See 5 page enclosure in pdf reference)

1992.09.08 (Estimated) (Jean Nader to Anthony O'Connell)
"Hi, Enclosed is most of the remaining cash in the estate.
Income tax copies are also on the way to you -
When the IRS appraisal comes, we will decide how to divide A. G. Edwards - any ideas?
Went to N York to see a few days of the tennis Open - great fun -
Good luck with your bull dozer engine - I enjoyed your letter! Love Jean"

1992.11.06 (Anthony O'Connell to Sheila O'Connell and Jean Nader)
"As shown on the enclosed bill, the real estate tax on Accotink for the second half of 1992 is $ 3,488.40, or divided among the three of us, $ 3,488.40/3= $ 1,162.80 each. I paid the full $ 3,488.40 today so would you please send me a check for $ 1,162.80? This is the only notlce you will get.
As you can see, the County still places a value of $600,000.00 on Accotink. I have not as yet had time to pursue the reevaluation fight."

1992.11.13 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, Jean Nader, and Sheila O'Connell)
"When I agreed yesterday to the disbursement of the A. G. Edwards accounts by the end of the year, I had not looked at the bank balance of the estate for some time. There is $64,216.83 in the estate account which includes the sum of $14,408.53 received today from the IRS for the estate tax overpayment.
To date the sum of $324,000.00 has been disbursed to the heirs, which has been done on the assumption that we have on hand enough money to pay the rest of the debts. Normally an estate is not disbursed until an Estate Tax Closing Letter has been received from the IRS and Virginia.
I cannot agree to a disbursement from the Edwards accounts until a closing letter is received. As you recall the Accotink property is assessed at $600,000.00 by the county. Based on the appraisal, we used one half of that figure (times the percentage interest owned by your mother). In the event the IRS does not agree and insists on the full valuation, the estate tax liability could increase by about $67,000.
Out of the bank account must come the executors' commission which will be about $45,000.00, a fee for the Fiduciary Income Tax return preparation and various filing fees of a small nature. There simply is not enough money left to cover the contingencies. A disbursal in these conditions would be a violation of the duty of the fiduciaries.
Since the IRS has issued the refund (with interest), I would assume a closing letter is not far behind.
Some questions have arisen as to your tax liabilities. The Estate paid an estate tax on the value of the property owned by your mother at her death. Since the tax is paid, what is distributed to you is tax free.
In addition there is a fiduciary income tax on the earnings of the estate while it is open. The First Accounting shows income of $56,928.52 from 9/15/91 through 9/15/92. Basically this is what will be taxed as estate income. Of this $659.97 can be ignored as it was repayment of a debt from the O'Connell Trust and not income, and at least $13,388.25 was tax free income. The fiduciary income tax is paid by the estate if it was not disbursed during the tax period. In your case it was disbursed, and you will receive a form K-1 showing how much should be added to your regular income. This is why it is called "pass through" income. This might be about $14,000.00 each not counting deductions which are due to the estate. Jo Ann Barnes is preparing this return for the estate at present.
The question of capital gains comes up often in estate situations. Any asset owned by a decedent at the time of death is given a "stepped up" basis to its value at the date of death. If the heirs then sell the asset the only taxable capital gain (or loss) is the change in value between the date of death and the date of sale. The Accotink property falls in that category, though the basis on the share formerly held in trust has a basis as of the date of your father's death. The Lynch note will not produce any capital gain since it was taxed in the estate as part of your mother's assets. It will produce an income tax effect on the fiduciary income tax return since $26,917.17 in interest was received by the estate. This is included in the $56,928.52 referred to above.
The remaining items left to do in the estate are the filing of a request for the publication of Debts and Demands against the estate, filing a second and final accounting, obtaining a court order for the distribution of the estate and filing a second fiduciary income tax return from the period 9/15/92 through the date of disbursement.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.11.16 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, Jean Nader, and Sheila O'Connell)
"Regretfully I have to amend my letter of Friday. There is no "stepped up basis" on the Lynch note according to the accountants who are preparing the fiduciary income tax return. This is subject to a credit for tax paid on part of it in the estate tax return, but it will result in an estimated $35,000 to $40,000.00 in tax to the estate due to the note payoff. This is one of the reasons why a further disbursement would not be vise.
In addition, Jo Ann Barnes commented to me today that the Accotink valuation could well result in a question by the IRS and she feels no disbursement should be made.
Some sale of the Edwards accounts will probably be needed.
Jo Ann also reminds me that each of you should check with your own tax adviser after receiving the K-1 forms as to payment of estimated income taxes.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

(Note: The bar notified Edward White of my complaint on December 10, 1992)
1992.12.11 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, Jean Nader, and Sheila O'Connell)
"As a result of information gleaned at an estate law seminar yesterday, I think there may be a way of reducing the estate tax.
The law has long allowed percentage discount for "minority" interests in land which pass from a decedent. This means that if the decedent owned a partial interest (less than 50%) of a piece of property, that the IRS would allow a discount of its true value since minority interests are extremely difficult to sell.
A very recent case has upheld this discount even where two family trusts with the same trustees and same beneficiaries wound up owning the property. A 15% discount was allowed. In our case, prior to your mother's death, she owned a 53.9006% interest in Accotink and the Harold O'Connell Trust owned the rest.
I have discussed this idea with Jo Ann Barnes who feels that even though 53.9006% is not a minority interest, that we might, nevertheless, get the discount. She suggests amending the return, asking for 30% and settling for 15%.
The IRS will counter with several arguments. One, is that it is not a minority interest. She feels we might prevail since it is only just over 50%. Second, since the land is held as tenants in common, it could be partitioned into smaller facts (zoning problems notwithstanding) and either the trust or any of you could sell your interest if a buyer could be found. The IRS will also argue that aspect. The normal course, however, would be for some discount to be allowed.
The bottom line on this is shown on the enclosed tax computation. A fifteen percent discount would result in a tax savings to each of you of $3151.31.
The disadvantages are:
1. This will, in Jo Ann's opinion, absolutely trigger an audit and negotiation.
2. The final disbursement will be delayed.
3. The basis to each of you in the property will be reduced and will result in an increased capital gains tax later on when the property is sold.
As to the last item, Jo Ann pointed out that while there might be a higher tax in the future, you would have the use of the tax savings money now, and that the capital gains rate is 28% whereas the estate is in a 39% federal bracket. As to the first and second items, there may well be an audit anyway on the Accotink valuation question.
I will leave this decision to you, and would ask that Jean coordinate the response. I will be going out of town on December 19 and will be back on January 11. I do not see how it can be done before then.
As to other items - We heard from Virginia concerning the amended income tax return. There was a penalty of $106.00 which I paid. The fiduciary income tax will be $56,000.00 mainly due to the capital gain on the note payoff. The estate is charged with this. Since the estate and the heirs are in the same bracket, there is no difference whether it is paid by the estate or you. There may even be a savings on state taxes depending on rates. Sincerely, Edward J. White"
(See the enclosure in the pdf reference)

1992.12.14 (Anthony O'Connell to Edward White)
"Thank you for your letter of December 11, 1992. I personally do not think pursuing the minority interest point is a good idea. I vote "no". All three beneficiaries own and operate their own business. For us, there are now two weeks left to make tax deductible disbursements. It would be quite helpful to me in my tax strategy to know my approximate taxable income. Would you please tell the beneficiaries your best estimate of our 1992 individual taxable income from the estate? Please use $300,000.00 as the evaluation of Accotink. Again, I ask that you please send the beneficiaries, with all deliberate haste, your close out schedule for my mother's estate. Please be as specific in dollars and dates as you possible can. I thank you in advance.
Sincerely, Anthony O'Connell "

1993.02.02 (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"At present the status of the estate is as follows:
Debts and Demands: A hearing following publication, for any creditors of the estate to come forward and press their claims was held on December 30, 1992 by the Commissioner of Accounts. No one appeared.
First Accounting: is still awaiting approval. I spoke to the Commissioner's office on January 29, and they said they are just beginning to review accounts filed in October. The account must be reviewed and any questions answered. (I have never known of a Commissioner who did not have some questions.) The account is then approved or disapproved, and the Commissioner files his report with the court. No time prediction can be made here as this is soley in the hands of the Commissioner.
Estate Tax Closinq Letter or communication in lieu of a closing letter. No time prediction can be made here as this is soley in the hands of the IRS. In estate's of this size an audit of some or all of the return is not at all unusual.
Motion for an Order to Show Cause why the estate should not be distributed. Filed by the estate after the report of the accounting has been filed with the Court by the Commissioner.
Order to Show Cause why the estate should not be distributed. This is entered by the Court upon the request (and appearance) of the estate, following two weeks publication. Order of Distribution. Presented to the Court following the
Show Cause proceeding. The Show Cause - Order of Distribution statutory scheme is the protection for the executors.
Distribution in accordance with the Order.
Second (and Final) Accountinq. Filed after distribution
showing all transactions since the First Accounting.
Second Fiduciary Income Tax Return Filed after distribution for the period following the first return (9/1/92 - ?)
The unknown factors as far as time is concerned are: 1) the federal and state tax closing letters, 2) When the Commissioner approves the accounting, 3) When the Commissioner makes his report to the Court, 4) Delays in the Clerk's office. The fiduciary has no control whatsoever over any of these items
Enclosed are checks to be signed to the Commissioner and to Keller-Bruner for the tax preparation. The accountant's bill is reasonable considering the complexity of the return involving tax free income, preliminary distributions and capital gains.
As far as an income prediction for the Estate is concerned, I can make no intelligent prediction since I do not know how long it will remain open. I have been continuously burned in making gratuitous comments about the tax liability of the heirs, and counsel and other attorney friends have stated to me, that given the performance of Mr. O'Connell, that I should make no comment at all. I tried to be helpful, but that did not work. I can only say that had I not been adamant about re-valuing the Accotink property, Mr. O'Connell's initial approach would have cost this estate dearly. From the comments in his recent demands for "information", I can see that he is jumping to conclusions based on no knowledge at all. I will not reply directly to him on any future aspect of this estate. As a matter of fact I am precluded as an attorney from dealing with an adverse party who is represented by counsel. I have no intentions of having him dictate the duties of the fiduciaries. If his counsel wishes to discuss anything, I am certainly available.
The present assets of the estate are:
(See this part in the pdf reference; this part is figures)
This totals $315,695.03, but is out of date since there have been additions since 12/31/92. These figures are taken from data at hand and do not represent any formal accounting by me. They are not furnished for any individual's use for personal tax purposes, and I disclaim any personal tax liability which might arise.
I am enclosing Edwards 12/31/92 statement which contains an entry for each asset's estimated annual yield. The amounts received from all of these funds will vary with market conditions. All of these Edwards assets are being reinvested, either in the specific funds or in Edwards Centennial Money Market Account. The estimates on Franklin, Kemper and ICA are much harder to figure. A complicating factor is that Nuveen, Kemper, Franklin and the Fairfax bond are tax free, though not all of them are Virginia tax free.
The following are the earnings from 9/1/92, the beginning date for the next fiduciary income tax return.
(See this part in the pdf reference; this part is figures)
It should be noted that some of these items are tax free.
Since the tax laws now require payment of estimated taxes after the first estate tax year, I will have to compute these later. They will be due in April, if the estate is still open then.
Finally, I would like, for the record some memorandum from you and Sheila concerning my earlier comments as to attempting a further reduction in the Accotink valuation.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1994.04.13 (Edward White to Jesse Wilson, copies to Jean Nader, Sheila O'Connell and "Edgar A. Prichard, Esq. Counsel for Anthony M. O'Connell")
Re: Estate of Jean M. O'Connell
Fiduciary #49160
"Enclosed is the Second and Final Accounting in this estate with vouchers, financial account statments, closing letters and the affidavit as to tax payments.
I hereby request that compensation to me as Co-Executor in the amount of $23,580.89 (2 1/2% of the adjusted gross receipts of the estate $943,235.84) be approved. A calculation sheet is attached.
Duties of the Co-Executor since' October 1991, have consisted of meeting with heirs, consulting with the broker handling certain of the estate assets as to investments and making decisions on asset management and sale, personally closing out the decedents bank accounts, resolving the matter of an unpaid bank loan to free the title to a vehicle, assisting in a successful appeal of the county assessment of real estate, managing the estate bank account, personal research as to asset value, preparation of all necessary administration documents, preparing decedent's federal and state income tax returns, preparing several years gift tax returns for decedent, preparing state and federal estate tax returns and amendments, personally contacting IRS to obtain closing letters, preparing financial data for the accountant to file three federal and state fiduciary income tax returns, responding to numerous letters of one of the heirs, closing and transferring a brokerage account and court appearance and pleadings for the Order of Distribution.
The time is estimated to be about 127 hours which is probably conservative. A time sheet is enclosed. Included is at least 4.75 hours which were spent in preparing an answer to a complaint filed with the Virginia State Bar by Anthony M. O'Connell which complaint was dismissed without a hearing.
Any questions concerning Mrs. Nader's (the other Co-Executor) commission should be addressed the other heirs. Mrs. Nader conducted all liason with the family members which was demanding and invaluable.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

Note: I don't understand why something this straight forward:
1992.05.12 I ask Tom Reed to do an appraisal that can be sent to the IRS.
1992.06.08 Tom Reed sends the completed appraisal to me.
1992.06.09 I send the appraisal to the co-executors.
Is made so confusing and antagonistic.

Gifts

Enclosures:
(1) "Cash(?), Notes, Stocks & Bonds
      "Detail: "Debt from Harold O'Connell Trust   659.97"
(2) "Tax computation" (Accotink reassessment)
(3) "AGREEMENT CONFIRMING DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE
We, Jean M. Nader and Sheila O'Connell-Shevenell, hereby confirm that one 1988 Plymouth Van was distributed to our brother, Anthony M. O'Connell by the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell, and that we hereby confirm and agree to that distribution. We further confirm and agree that this distribution shall not be charged against Anthony M. O'Connell's share of the estate and that the remaining net proceeds of the estate after settlement of all debts and obligations shall be divided in three equal shares.
DATE: May 1, 1992
*_____              *_____
Jean M. Nader (seal)        Sheila O'Connell (seal)"

1992.05.04 (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"[Appraisal] Enclosed is the form for appealing the tax assessment of the Accotink property. On page 2, it states that there is a June 1 deadline. I do not think we can make a claim of a lesser value on the estate tax return if we do not file an appeal with the county. To fail do appeal it would hurt our argument with the IRS.
The summary of the estate tax computation and the interplay of the gift tax is as follows: 1. In computing the estate tax, the gross estate (which includes anything which passes due to death whether in the probate estate or not) is figured, the debts subtracted and the "taxable estate" is ascertained.
2. The tax is then computed on the taxable estate. From this figure is subtracted a "unified credit" of $192,800 (equivalent to a taxable estate of $600,000).
3. Lifetime gifts in excess of $10,000 to any one individual are taxable at the estate/gift tax rates. Each year the donor should have filed a gift tax return, though no Lax is due unless the entire $192,800 credit has been used in making the gifts.
4. Each gift over $10,000 uses a portion of the unified credit, thus reducing the amount of that credit available to apply to the estate tax.
In our case the lifetime gifts used up $9784.00 of the available credit. A list of the gifts is enclosed. Returns for 1989 and 1991 must be filed. As fiduciaries we must certify to the IRS that the return is true and correct. We have personal liability in that regard. If we have knowledge of a gift to Tony of $15,000, we must report it. [Gifts] Tony is going to have to answer that question before we can be satisfied. If he claims he did not receive the money, he will have to supply us with an affidavit to that effect.
As far as the management of an estate undergoing the probate process is concerned, the Executors are entitled to some latitude within the confines of their fiduciary duty. The decisions about the estate are theirs.
My personal operational mode in these matters is to keep the heirs fully supplied with the paperwork of the estate, and consult with them fully as to strategic and long range issues, such as the valuation of property in the Accotink situation. The day to day matters and the justification for tactical positions taken such as the contents of forms and accountings are the prerogative of the Executors and subject to the scrutiny and approval of the Commissioner of Accounts or the taxing authorities only. [Debts (using K-1 coming)] With regard to the filing of the income tax return, my file indicates that I received a fax copy of the K-1 from the Harold O'Connell Trust on April 9, 1992, only six days before the tax return was due.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.07.16 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader and E. A. Prichard)
"In order that I might file an accurate estate tax return, I need to know the following:
At any time prior to your mother's death did you receive in any one or more calendar years, gifts from her totaling more than $10,000.00?
If you did, please list the dates and amounts of each gift.
If you did not, let me know.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.07.17 (Anthony O'Connell to Edward White) (Copies to Jean Nader and Edgar Prichard)
"I received one and only one gift from my mother in excess of $10,000.00. As shown on her enclosed Form 709 for 1988, I received $15,000.00 on April 22, 1988.
Please let me know if you need any other information.
Yours truly, Anthony O'Connell "

1992.07.20 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell)
"Thank you very much for sending a copy of the 1988 gift tax return. I could tell from the 1990 return that a gift had been made to someone, but I never had a copy of the 1988 return.
Your assistance has been most helpful.
As soon as we can arrive at a final figure for Accotink, we should be able to file the estate tax return."

Debts

1992.02.18   (Anthony O'Connell to Burner, Kane & McCarthy, Limited)
"Would you please do these 1991 fiduciary returns?
1. Federal, and K-1's sent to Jean O'Connell's {SSN 230-50- 6044) estate and the three secondary beneficiaries. The three secondary beneficiaries are:
A. Sheila O'Connell SSN 224-54-7273 44 Carleton Street Portland, Maine 04102
B. Jean O'Connell Nader SSN 225-50-9052   350 Fourth; Avenue   New Kensington, Pennsylvania 15068
C. Anthony O'Connell SSN 225-52-7637   5541 Franconia Road Springfield, Virginia 22150
2. Virginia
3. Fairfax County {Commissioner of Accounts}, Seventh Account Because Ms. JoAnn Barnes has been handling Jean O'Connell's taxes and is familiar with this installment sale, perhaps she would prefer to handle it. I would appreciate it if you would save your working papers for me. I would particularly like to see how you compute the 2% floor on line 15a of Form 1041 and the alternative minimum tax for fiduciaries with it's DNAMTI.
Page three of the trust instrument {enclosed} states, with qualifiers, that the net income of the trust is to go to Jean O'Connell. Rather than waiting until the end of the year to compute the exact net income, I estimated it in April when the annual payment from the installment sale was received. Consequently, I think I have over distributed and perhaps distributed a cumulative $7,389.87 in principal to Jean O'Connell. Perhaps this amount is incorrect. The Commissioner of Accounts advises me that I should request this back from the estate {and where it won't he hit with an estate tax). On the other hand perhaps it is not worth the amended returns. Would you please advise me of my options and their respective consequences?
(Note: This portion is accounting and not included here)
The following financial papers, or copies of financial papers, are enclosed:
1. Federal and Virginia returns for 1988, 1989 and 1990. Missouri returns for 1988 and 1989 {I had a trust account in Missouri at that time). The "Gross profit percentage" on the 1988 installment sale is 94.1349%. I used a rounded 94% on the 1388 return.
2. Fairfax County Trust Accounts One through Six.The Fifth {1989) and Sixth {1990)Accounts to the Commissioner have not been officially approved yet but today "Stephanie" at the Commissioner's Office {703 385- 0268) said they look correct. Because the Fifth Account was corrected after the Sixth Account was submitted, and the correction caused a net increase in assets of only $1.01, "Stephanie" says the change is not significant enough to revise the Sixth Account.
3. Data for Seventh Account {1991) to Fairfax County Commissioner of Accounts.
4. Check book record and checks 200-283 except:
202 stopped payment    210 torn up 237 torn up 250 torn up 260 torn up 273-278 all November, missing
5. Monthly bank statements and spreadsheet for 1991.
6. 1099 Int $ 48,181.18    1099 Int 1,612.08    1099 Int 953.80   1095, Int 58.53
7. Summary "Trust. 92"
8. Will of 3.A. O'Connell, page 3"

Note: The Lynch payment of $545,820 to the Estate on April 21, 1992, is not mentioned and does not show in the accountings. Does anyone know a journalist with a background in accounting who would do whatever it takes to expose the accounting trails of the CPA Joanne Barnes and the Attorney Edward White at Book 467 page 191 (pdf) in the public record and find out where the money went? Missing $545,820. And warn other families of the accountant's methods?

Enclosures:
(1) "Cash(?), Notes, Stocks & Bonds
      "Detail: "Debt from Harold O'Connell Trust   659.97"
(2) "Tax computation" (Accotink reassessment)
(3) "AGREEMENT CONFIRMING DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE
We, Jean M. Nader and Sheila O'Connell-Shevenell, hereby confirm that one 1988 Plymouth Van was distributed to our brother, Anthony M. O'Connell by the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell, and that we hereby confirm and agree to that distribution. We further confirm and agree that this distribution shall not be charged against Anthony M. O'Connell's share of the estate and that the remaining net proceeds of the estate after settlement of all debts and obligations shall be divided in three equal shares.
DATE: May 1, 1992
*_____              *_____
Jean M. Nader (seal)        Sheila O'Connell (seal)"

1992.04.22 (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"Enclosed is an agreement which should satisfy Tony as to the car. It cannot be any clearer.
Also enclosed is a preliminary analysis of the estate tax, which should be close to being accurate. I do need to check with Jo Ann Barnes as to a technical question as to whether or not any of your father's trust comes into this. I do not think it does, but there have been many changes in the law since that trust was established. I will have to ask her to bill us for that advice and any other technical tax matters I am not comfortable with. I can do most of the rest of the tax work and save the estate some money.
The executors' commission shown on the analysis is not figured on the value of the realty; however it does not include the 5% commission on the receipts of the estate in addition to the inventory.
In order to file that return and the subsequent Fiduciary Income tax return we will need an accounting from Tony from the date of his last accounting to the date of death. If he does not want to prepare it, I will not agree to any preliminary disbursal to him at all, and will seek your approval to file suit against him to compel the accounting, plus damages to the estate for his delay. Since that trust terminated on your mother's death, his final accounting is due now and not in October.
There will be no further explanations or written entreaties to him as far as I am concerned. He has the duty and he will perform it under a court order if necessary. Of course he will furnish that receipt.
The preliminary analysis contains three alternatives on Accotink at the bottom for your consideration.
In the event that we do seek a reduction in the assessment Tony will be given written notice that his prompt cooperation is necessary and that if he fails to cooperate that he is aware of the adverse consequences to the estate and is responsible for them.
As far as further steps are concerned, we have a lot to do. No gift tax returns were filed for 1989 and 1991 which will have to be done. The results of those gifts are factored in under "Unified Credit used for gifts 9,784".
The paper trail in the court and IRS is as follows:
File Estate tax by June 15, 1992
File First Accounting (16 months after qualification but can be sooner)
Ask for posting of Debts and Demands against the estate.
File Fiduciary Income tax returns for period 9/15/91-9/15/92, due January 1, 1993.
File Motion for a Show Cause why distribution should not be made. Submit Show Cause Order.
Request Executor's exoneration letter from IRS and Virginia.
Obtain closing letter from IRS and Virginia as to estate tax returns.
File 1993 Fiduciary tax returns (Sept. 1992-distribution)
File for Order allowing distribution.
Distribute estate.
File Final Accounting.
Normally distribution is withheld until the Order of Distribution is entered. As I indicated the creditors have one year to press claims against the estate. No prudent executor will distribute before that period, the entry of the Order of Distribution and the receipt of the tax closing letters.
Sincerely, Edward J. White

Enclosures:
(1) "Cash(?), Notes, Stocks & Bonds
      "Detail: "Debt from Harold O'Connell Trust   659.97"
(2) "Tax computation" (Accotink reassessment)
(3) "AGREEMENT CONFIRMING DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE
We, Jean M. Nader and Sheila O'Connell-Shevenell, hereby confirm that one 1988 Plymouth Van was distributed to our brother, Anthony M. O'Connell by the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell, and that we hereby confirm and agree to that distribution. We further confirm and agree that this distribution shall not be charged against Anthony M. O'Connell's share of the estate and that the remaining net proceeds of the estate after settlement of all debts and obligations shall be divided in three equal shares.
DATE: May 1, 1992
*_____              *_____
Jean M. Nader (seal)        Sheila O'Connell (seal)"

1992.05.06 (Anthony O'Connell to Jean Nader)
"I will send you and Mr. White a copy of the court accounting from the trust for the period 1/1/91 thru 12/31/91 by the end of this month. If that is not soon enough please let me know and I will do what I can. It is all but complete but I want to go over it again and possible make some adjustments. The estate may owe the trust something. That would be to the beneficiaries benefit because that would avoid the estate tax so the eventual distribution to the beneficiaries would be greater. As you can see from the attached enclosure, the Commissioner of Accounts has advised me that this account is 'not due until 10-20-93.
If there is any other information Mr. White needs from the trust, he should write to me, the trustee, telling me what it is. If he is not willing to do this, I can not be responsible. Mr. White position as co-executor allows him no authority over the trust. He should not charge us extra to find that out. Please tell me if there is anything else you need besides the 1991 court accounting from the trust, or of any other way I can be of help to you. For a second opinion on anything, I would suggest you call Mr. Ed Prichard of McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe at (703) 712-5000. I will take care of any fees you incur."

1992.05.14 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader)
Enclosed is the Estate's check in the amount of $75,000.00 as a partial disbursement. Similar sums have been paid to Jean and Sheila. I have mailed an additional check to you in the amount of $230.14 to Jean to be signed. This represents interest at 4% (the bank rate on the estate account) from April 22, the day of the disbursements to Sheila and Jean, through May 20, 1992, approximately the day you should receive it from her.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.05.19 (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, c/o E.A. Prichard, copy to Jean Nader)
"In your letter of May 6 to Jean you asked that I communicate with you with regard to the Harold O'Connell Trust.
I am trying to prepare the estate tax, and as usual in these cases, there are problems trying to understand the flow of debts and income.
I do have a few questions which are put forward simply so that the figures on the Trust's tax returns and accounting will agree with the estate's.
1. The K-1 filed by the Trust for 1991 showed income to your mother of $41,446.00. The Seventh Accounting appears to show a disbursement to her of $40,000.00 plus first half realty taxes paid by the trust for her and thus a disbursal to her of $1794.89. If these two disbursals are added the sum is $41,794.89. This leaves $348.89 which I cannot figure out. It could well be a disbursal of principal and not taxable.
2. The K-1 filed by the Trust showed a payment of $816.00 in interest to the estate. You sent a check in the amount of $1475.97 to the estate. What was the remaining $659.97? Do I have this confused with the tax debt/credit situation which ran from the Third Accounting?
3. On the Seventh Accounting "Income per 7th Account" is shown as $5181.71, but I cannot figure that one out either.
I am of the opinion that the estate owes the trust for the second half real estate taxes from September 15, 1991 through December 31, 1991 in the amount of $1052.35. This is shown on your accounting a disbursed to the heirs. Should this be paid back to the heirs or to the Trust?
I believe that the income received from the savings accounts from September 15 to the date the various banks made their next payment to the Trust (9/30 and 9/21) should be split on a per diem basis, since the Trust terminated on her death. This will be a small amount of course.
Are there any other debts which your Mother owed the Trust?
I realize that Jo Ann Barnes prepared this and if you authorize it I can ask her to help me out.
Please understand that I have no problem with the Accounting, I m just trying to match things up. In the long run, since the beneficiaries are the same, the matter is academic. Please send the bill for the appraisal whenever you receive it. Jean is filing the Fairfax form for re-assessment in her capacity as a co-owner in order to give us a better basis to get this assessment changed and to meet the county's deadline. It will state that the appraisal you have ordered will follow. I think this will be to all of your benefit in the long run.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

1992.06.15 Original due date for estate tax return (IRS Form 760)

Three reasons 144kb

Appraisal

Gifts

Debts

Three reasons
144kb