RSA 88-A Uniform Estate Tax Apportionment Act
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
88-A:3 Procedure for Determining Apportionment.
I. The probate court having jurisdiction over the administration of the estate of a decedent shall determine the apportionment of the tax. If there are no probate proceedings, the probate court of the county wherein the decedent was domiciled at death upon the application of the person required to pay the tax shall determine the apportionment of the tax. II. If the probate court finds that it is inequitable to apportion interest and penalties in the manner provided in RSA 88-A:2, because of special circumstances, it may direct apportionment thereof in the manner it finds equitable. III. The expenses reasonably incurred by any fiduciary and by persons interested in the estate in connection with the determination of the amount and apportionment of the tax shall be apportioned as provided in RSA 88-A:2 and charged and collected as a part of the tax apportioned. If the probate court finds it is inequitable to apportion the expenses as provided in RSA 88-A:2, it may direct apportionment thereof equitably. IV. If the probate court finds that the assessment of penalties and interest assessed in relation to the tax is due to delay caused by the negligence of the fiduciary, the court may charge the fiduciary with the amount of the assessed penalties and interest. V. In any suit or judicial proceeding to recover from any person interested in the estate the amount of the tax apportioned to the person in accordance with this chapter, the determination of the probate court in respect thereto shall be prima facie correct. Source. 1959, 158:1. 1996, 83:1, eff. Jan. 1, 1997.
88-A:3 Procedure for Determining Apportionment.
I. The probate court having jurisdiction over the administration of the estate of a decedent shall determine the apportionment of the tax. If there are no probate proceedings, the probate court of the county wherein the decedent was domiciled at death upon the application of the person required to pay the tax shall determine the apportionment of the tax. II. If the probate court finds that it is inequitable to apportion interest and penalties in the manner provided in RSA 88-A:2, because of special circumstances, it may direct apportionment thereof in the manner it finds equitable. III. The expenses reasonably incurred by any fiduciary and by persons interested in the estate in connection with the determination of the amount and apportionment of the tax shall be apportioned as provided in RSA 88-A:2 and charged and collected as a part of the tax apportioned. If the probate court finds it is inequitable to apportion the expenses as provided in RSA 88-A:2, it may direct apportionment thereof equitably. IV. If the probate court finds that the assessment of penalties and interest assessed in relation to the tax is due to delay caused by the negligence of the fiduciary, the court may charge the fiduciary with the amount of the assessed penalties and interest. V. In any suit or judicial proceeding to recover from any person interested in the estate the amount of the tax apportioned to the person in accordance with this chapter, the determination of the probate court in respect thereto shall be prima facie correct. Source. 1959, 158:1. 1996, 83:1, eff. Jan. 1, 1997.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.