I received the following info by email from Colleen. I haven’t verified any of the info, but if the info is valid, it could be (as Colleen says) BIG.
“Well, someone FINALLY did it. They found in the IRS manual the “proof” of when we “claimed” life. I write this in past tense sense when we got a social security number (a lot of us when we applied for a drivers license) is when we were NOT CONSIDERED decedents. Here’s the wordage…
“IRS manual 126.96.36.199.2.2 – An infant is the decedent of an estate or grantor, owner or trustor of a trust, guardianship, receivership or custodianship that has yet to receive an SSN.”
I’m not at all sure that the previous interpretation of the text alleged to be in the IRS manual is correct. It may be that the section of the IRM is saying that an “infant” is legally defined to be either:
1) the decedent of an estate (meaning the infant died at or before birth); or,
2) the grantor (etc) of a trust (etc.) that has not yet received a SSN (but this grantor is born alive).
I wonder if the entity that “is yet to receive a SSN” is the living infant or the trust (etc.) that the living infant/grantor is presumed to have created.
What happens if the infant and/or newly created “trust” doesn’t get a SSN?
What rationale presumes that a living infant is even capable of granting/creating a trust? If the existence of this “infant’s trust” proves to be debilitating when the infant grows to be an adult, can the trust’s existence be challenged by the adult by claiming that he/she was absolutely incapable of the intention required to granting/creating a trust as an infant–and therefore the presumptive “trust” is invalid?
There are a bunch of questions and possibilities that flow from the IRS Manual text. I’m in the process of moving my domicile to another State. I don’t have time to chase those questions at this time. I hope that some of you will start to research this quoted section of the IRS Manual to, first, verify that the text is accurate, and then, to look at the context of that section to try to discover whatever ti really means.
But if their use of “decedent” does not apply to an infant that died at birth, but instead applies to a living child, this may offer some insight into the birth certificate, the all-upper case name, etc.
I.e., so far as I know the names on tombstones are always in all-upper-case letters. It may be that such all-upper-case names mark the remains of the “decedent” of an estate. If so, it might follow that “ALFRED N ADASK” is the name of the decedent of the estate named “Alfred Adask”.
Am I, Alfred, an “estate”? Or is the “estate” what remains after I pass on? In either case, the IRS Manual’s text may help to explain why some people argue that you must write up a “will” to help keep the gov-co (“this state”) off your back?
For example, what if I (the living man “Alfred”) drafted a will that declared how I wanted my remains (the “decedent” named “ALFRED N ADASK”?) to be handled? Clearly, I could write a will to say that if I died, I’d want my remains buried next to my grandmother, or cremated, or perhaps even shot into orbit around the world.
But. If it were presumed by “this state” that “ALFRED N ADASK” is already a “decedent,” then it might follow that I could draft a will now to declare how I wanted “my” decedent (“ADASK”) to be treated now–even before I have actually passed on.
What if, the next time I was stopped for a traffic violation and asked for my ID, I presented a properly drafted, verified and recorded “Last Will and Testament” that explained how I wanted “ALFRED N ADASK” to be treated?
In any case, I hope some of you will investigate “IRS manual 188.8.131.52.2.2” and comment below.