text:
# 26 CFR § 20.2056A-4 - Procedures for conforming marital trusts and nontrust marital transfers to the requirements of a qualified domestic trust.

§ 20.2056A-4 Procedures for conforming marital trusts and nontrust marital transfers to the requirements of a qualified domestic trust.

(a) Marital trusts -

(1) In general. If an interest in property passes from the decedent to a trust for the benefit of a noncitizen surviving spouse and if the trust otherwise qualifies for a marital deduction but for the provisions of section 2056(d)(1)(A), the property interest is treated as passing to the surviving spouse in a QDOT if the trust is reformed, either in accordance with the terms of the decedent's will or trust agreement or pursuant to a judicial proceeding, to meet the requirements of a QDOT. For this purpose, the requirements of a QDOT include all of the applicable requirements set forth in § 20.2056A-2, and the requirements of § 20.2056A-2T(d). A reformation pursuant to the terms of the decedent's will or trust instrument must be completed by the time prescribed (including extensions) for filing the decedent's estate tax return. For purposes of this paragraph (a), a return filed prior to the due date (including extensions) is considered filed on the last date that the return is required to be filed (including extensions), and a late return filed at any time after the due date is considered filed on the date that it is actually filed.

(2) Judicial reformations. In general, a reformation pursuant to a judicial proceeding is permitted under this section if the reformation is commenced on or before the due date (determined with regard to extensions actually granted) for filing the return of tax imposed by chapter 11 of the Internal Revenue Code, regardless of the date that the return is actually filed. The reformation (either pursuant to a judicial proceeding or otherwise) must result in a trust that is effective under local law. The reformed trust may be revocable by the spouse, or otherwise be subject to the spouse's general power of appointment, provided that no person (including the spouse) has the power to amend the trust during the continued existence of the trust such that it would no longer qualify as a QDOT. Prior to the time that the judicial reformation is completed, the trust must be treated as a QDOT. Thus, the trustee of the trust is responsible for filing the Form 706-QDT, paying any section 2056A estate tax that becomes due, and filing the annual statement required under § 20.2056A-2T(d)(3), if applicable. Failure to comply with these requirements may cause the trust to be subject to the anti-abuse rule under § 20.2056A-2T(d)(1)(iv). In addition, if the judicial reformation is terminated prior to the time that the reformation is completed, the estate of the decedent is required to pay the increased estate tax imposed on the decedent's estate (plus interest and any applicable penalties) that becomes due at the time of such termination as a result of the failure of the trust to comply with section 2056(d). See section 6511 as to applicable time periods for credit or refund of tax.

(3) Tolling of statutory assessment period. For the tolling of the statute of limitations in the case of a judicial reformation, see section 2056(d)(5)(B).

(b) Nontrust marital transfers -

(1) In general. Under section 2056(d)(2)(B), if an interest in property passes outright from a decedent to a noncitizen surviving spouse either by testamentary bequest or devise, by operation of law, or pursuant to an annuity or other similar plan or arrangement, and such property interest otherwise qualifies for a marital deduction except that it does not pass in a QDOT, solely for purposes of section 2056(d)(2)(A), the property is treated as passing to the surviving spouse in a QDOT if the property interest is either actually transferred to a QDOT before the estate tax return is filed and on or before the last date prescribed by law that the QDOT election may be made, or is assigned to a QDOT under an enforceable and irrevocable written assignment made on or before the date on which the return is filed and on or before the last date prescribed by law that the QDOT election may be made. The transfer or assignment of property to a QDOT may be made by the surviving spouse, the surviving spouse's legal representative (if the surviving spouse is incompetent), or the personal representative of the surviving spouse's estate (if the surviving spouse has died). The QDOT to which the property is transferred may be created by the decedent (during life or by will), by the surviving spouse, or by the executor. For purposes of section 2056(d)(2)(B), if no property other than the property passing to the surviving spouse from the decedent is transferred to the QDOT, the transferee QDOT need not be in a form such that the property transferred to the QDOT would qualify for a marital deduction under section 2056(a). However, if other property is or has been transferred to the QDOT, 100 percent of the value of the transferee QDOT must qualify for the marital deduction under section 2056. For example, if the decedent, a U.S. citizen, bequeaths property to a trust that does not satisfy the requirements of section 2056(b)(5) or (7), or to a trust that does not qualify as an estate trust under § 20.2056(c)-2(b)(1)(i)-(iii), that trust cannot be used as a transferee QDOT by the surviving spouse, since after that trust is fully funded the portion of the value of the trust attributable to property bequeathed to the trust by the decedent will not qualify for a marital deduction under section 2056. Similarly, if the decedent, a nonresident not a citizen of the United States, bequeaths foreign situs assets to a trust created under his will, the surviving spouse may not transfer U.S. situs assets passing to the spouse outside of the will to that trust under this paragraph. See § 20.2056A-3(c) with respect to protective elections. See § 20.2056A-3(a) with respect to the time limitations for making the QDOT election.

(2) Form of transfer or assignment. A transfer or assignment of property to a QDOT must be in writing and otherwise be in accordance with all local law requirements for such assignment or transfer. The transfer or assignment may be of a specific asset or a group of assets, or a fractional share of either, or may be of a pecuniary amount. A transfer or assignment of less than an entire interest in an asset or a group of assets may be expressed by means of a formula (such as the minimum amount necessary to reduce the estate tax to zero). In the case of a transfer, a copy of the trust instrument evidencing the transfer must be submitted with the decedent's estate tax return. In the case of an assignment, a copy of the assignment must be submitted with the decedent's estate tax return.

(3) Assets eligible for transfer or assignment. If a transfer or assignment is of a specific asset or group of assets, only assets included in the decedent's gross estate and passing from the decedent to the spouse (or the proceeds from the sale, exchange or conversion of such assets) may be transferred or assigned to the QDOT. The noncitizen surviving spouse may not transfer or assign to the QDOT property owned by the surviving spouse at the time of the decedent's death in lieu of property included in the decedent's gross estate that passes to the spouse (or in lieu of the proceeds from the sale, exchange or conversion of such includible assets). In addition, if only a portion of an asset is includible in the decedent's gross estate, the spouse may only transfer the portion that is so includible to the transferee trust under this paragraph (b)(3).

(4) Pecuniary assignment - special rules. If the assignment is expressed in the form of a pecuniary amount (such as a fixed dollar amount or a formula designed to reduce the decedent's estate tax to zero), the assignment must specify that -

(i) Assets actually transferred to the QDOT in satisfaction of the assignment have an aggregate fair market value on the date of actual transfer to the QDOT amounting to no less than the amount of the pecuniary transfer or assignment; or

(ii) The assets actually transferred to the QDOT be fairly representative of appreciation or depreciation in the value of all property available for transfer to the QDOT between the valuation date and the date of actual transfer to the QDOT, if the assignment is to be satisfied by accounting for the assets on the basis of their fair market value as of some date before the date of actual transfer to the QDOT.

(5) Transfer tax treatment of transfer or assignment. Property assigned or transferred to a QDOT pursuant to section 2056(d)(2)(B) is treated as passing from the decedent to a QDOT solely for purposes of section 2056(d)(2)(A). For all other purposes (e.g., income, gift, estate, generation-skipping transfer tax, and section 1491 excise tax), the surviving spouse is treated as the transferor of the property to the QDOT. However, the spouse is not considered the transferor of property to a QDOT if the transfer by the spouse constitutes a transfer that satisfies the requirements of section 2518(c)(3). For a special exception to the valuation rules of section 2702 in the case of a transfer by the surviving spouse to a QDOT, see § 25.2702-1(c)(8) of this chapter.

(6) Period for completion of transfer. Property irrevocably assigned but not actually transferred to the QDOT before the estate tax return is filed must actually be conveyed and transferred to the QDOT under applicable local law before the administration of the decedent's estate is completed. If there is no administration of the decedent's estate (because for example, none of the decedent's assets are subject to probate under local law), the conveyance must be made on or before the date that is one year after the due date (including extensions) for filing the decedent's estate tax return. If an actual transfer to the QDOT is not timely made, section 2056(d)(1)(A) applies and the marital deduction is not allowed. The executor of the decedent's estate (or other authorized legal representative) may request a private letter ruling from the Internal Revenue Service requesting an extension of the time for completing the conveyance or waiving the actual conveyance under specified circumstances under § 301.9100-1(a) of this chapter.

(7) Retirement accounts and annuities -

(i) In general. An assignment otherwise in compliance with this paragraph (b) of rights under annuities or other similar arrangements that are assignable and thus, are not described in paragraph (c) of this section, is treated as a transfer of such property to the QDOT regardless of the method of payment actually elected under such annuity or plan.

(ii) Individual retirement annuities. Individual retirement annuities described in section 408(b) are not assignable pursuant to section 408(b)(1) and thus, do not come within the purview of this paragraph (b)(7). See the procedures provided in paragraph (c) of this section.

(iii) Individual retirement accounts. Unless the terms of the account provide otherwise, individual retirement accounts described in section 408(a) are assignable and subject to the provisions of this paragraph (b)(7). However, under paragraph (c) of this section, the surviving spouse may treat an individual retirement account as nonassignable and, therefore, eligible for the procedures in paragraph (c) of this section if the spouse timely complies with the requirements in paragraph (c) of this section.

(iv) Other effects of assignment. The provisions of this paragraph (b)(7) apply solely for purposes of qualifying the annuity or account under the rules of § 20.2056A-2 and this section. See, for example, section 408(d) and 4980A regarding the consequences of an assignment for purposes other than this paragraph (b)(7).

(8) Protective assignment. A protective assignment of property to a QDOT may be made only if, at the time the federal estate tax return is filed, the executor of the decedent's estate reasonably believes that there is a bona fide issue that concerns either the residency or citizenship of the decedent, the citizenship of the surviving spouse, whether all or a portion of an asset is includible in the decedent's gross estate, or the amount or nature of the property the surviving spouse is entitled to receive. For example, if at the time the federal estate tax return is filed, either the estate is involved in a bona fide will contest, there is uncertainty regarding the inclusion in the gross estate of an asset which, if includible, would be eligible for the QDOT election, or there is uncertainty regarding the status of the decedent as a resident alien or a nonresident alien for estate tax purposes, or a similar uncertainty regarding the citizenship status of the surviving spouse, a protective assignment may be made. The protective assignment must be made on a written statement signed by the assignor under penalties of perjury on or before the date prescribed under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, and must identify the specific assets to which the assignment refers and the specific basis for the protective assignment. However, the protective assignment may otherwise be defined by means of a formula (such as the minimum amount necessary to reduce the estate tax to zero). Once made, the protective assignment cannot be revoked. For example, if a protective assignment is made because a bona fide question exists as to the includibility of an asset in the decedent's gross estate and it is later finally determined that the asset is so includible, the protective assignment becomes effective with respect to the asset and cannot thereafter be revoked. Protective assignments are, in all events, subject to paragraph (b)(6) of this section. A copy of the protective assignment must be submitted with the decedent's estate tax return.

(c) Nonassignable annuities and other arrangements -

(1) Definition and general rule. For purposes of this section, a nonassignable annuity or other arrangement means a plan, annuity, or other arrangement (whether qualified or not qualified under part I of subchapter D of chapter 1 of subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code) that qualifies for the marital deduction but for section 2056(d)(1)(A), and whose payments are not assignable or transferable to the QDOT under either federal law (see, e.g., section 401(a)(13)), state law, foreign law, or the terms of the plan or arrangement itself. For purposes of this paragraph (c), a surviving spouse's interest as beneficiary of an individual retirement annuity described in section 408(b) is a nonassignable annuity or other arrangement. See section 408(b)(1). For purposes of this paragraph (c), a surviving spouse's interest as beneficiary of an individual retirement account described in section 408(a), although assignable under that section, is considered to be a nonassignable annuity or other arrangement eligible for the procedures contained in this paragraph (c), at the option of the surviving spouse, if the requirements of this paragraph are otherwise satisfied. See paragraph (b)(7) of this section if the spouse elects to treat the account as assignable. In the case of a plan, annuity, or other arrangement which is not assignable or transferable (or is treated as such), the property passing under the plan from the decedent is treated as meeting the requirements § 20.2056A-2, and the requirements of § 20.2056A-2T(d) (pertaining, respectively, to general requirements, qualified marital interest requirements, statutory requirements, and requirements to ensure collection of the tax) if the requirements of either paragraph (c)(2) or (3) of this section are satisfied. Thus, the property will be treated as passing in the form of a QDOT, notwithstanding that the spouse does not irrevocably transfer or assign the annuity or other payment to the QDOT as provided in paragraph (b) of this section. The Commissioner will prescribe by administrative guidance the extent, if any, to which the provisions of this paragraph (c) apply to a rollover from a qualified trust to an eligible retirement plan within the meaning of section 402(c) or a distribution from an individual retirement account or an individual retirement annuity that is paid into an individual retirement account or an individual retirement annuity within the meaning of section 408(d)(3).

(2) Agreement to remit section 2056A estate tax on corpus portion of each annuity payment. The requirements of this paragraph (c)(2) are satisfied if -

(i) The noncitizen surviving spouse agrees to pay on an annual basis, as described in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this section, the estate tax imposed under section 2056A(b)(1) due on the corpus portion, as defined in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, of each nonassignable annuity or other payment received under the plan or arrangement. However, for purposes of this paragraph (c)(2), if the financial circumstances of the spouse are such that an amount equal to all or a portion of the corpus portion of a nonassignable annuity payment received by the spouse would be subject to a hardship exemption (as defined in § 20.2056A-5(c)) if paid from a QDOT, then all or a corresponding part of the corpus portion will be exempt from the tax payment requirement under this paragraph (c)(2);

(ii) The executor of the decedent's estate files with the estate tax return the Information Statement described in paragraph (c)(5) of this section;

(iii) The executor files with the estate tax return the Agreement To Pay Section 2056A Estate Tax described in paragraph (c)(6) of this section; and

(iv) The executor makes the election under § 20.2056A-3 with respect to the nonassignable annuity or other payment.

(3) Agreement to roll over corpus portion of annuity payment to QDOT. The requirements of this paragraph (c)(3) are satisfied if -

(i) The noncitizen surviving spouse agrees to roll over and transfer, within the time prescribed under paragraph (c)(7)(i) of this section, the corpus portion of each annuity payment to a QDOT, whether the QDOT is created by the decedent's will, the executor of the decedent's estate, or the surviving spouse. However, for purposes of this section, if the financial circumstances of the spouse are such that an amount equal to all or a portion of the corpus portion of a nonassignable annuity payment received by the spouse would be subject to a hardship exemption (as defined in § 20.2056A-5(c)) if paid from a QDOT, then all or a corresponding part of the corpus portion will be exempt from the rollover requirement under this paragraph (c)(3);

(ii) A QDOT for the benefit of the surviving spouse is established prior to the date that the estate tax return is filed and on or prior to the last date prescribed by law that the QDOT election may be made;

(iii) The executor of the decedent's estate files with the estate tax return the Information Statement described in paragraph (c)(5) of this section;

(iv) The executor files with the estate tax return the Agreement To Roll Over Annuity Payments described in paragraph (c)(7) of this section; and

(v) The executor makes the election under § 20.2056A-3 with respect to the nonassignable annuity or other payment. See § 20.2056A-5(c)(3)(iv)(A), regarding distributions from the QDOT reimbursing the spouse for income taxes paid (either by actual payment or withholding) by the spouse with respect to amounts transferred to the QDOT pursuant to this paragraph (c)(3).

(4) Determination of corpus portion -

(i) Corpus portion. For purposes of this paragraph (c), the corpus portion of each nonassignable annuity or other payment is the corpus amount of the annual payment divided by the total annual payment.

(ii) Corpus amount.

(A) The corpus amount of the annual payment is determined in accordance with the following formula:

$\text{Corpus Amount}=\frac{\text{Total present value of annuity or other payment}}{\text{Expected annuity term}}$

(B) The total present value of the annuity or other payment is the present value of the nonassignable annuity or other payment as of the date of the decedent's death, determined in accordance with the interest rates and mortality data prescribed by section 7520. The expected annuity term is the number of years that would be required for the scheduled payments to exhaust a hypothetical fund equal to the present value of the scheduled payments. This is determined by first dividing the total present value of the payments by the annual payment. From the quotient so obtained, the expected annuity term is derived by identifying the term of years that corresponds to the annuity factor equal to the quotient. This is determined by using column 1 of Table B, for the applicable interest rate, contained in Publication 1457, “Actuarial Valuations Version 3A”. A copy of this publication is available, at no charge, electronically via the IRS Internet site at http://www.irs.gov. If the quotient obtained falls between two terms, the longer term is used.

(5) Information Statement -

(i) In general. In order for a nonassignable annuity or other payment described in this paragraph (c) to qualify under either paragraph (c) (2) or (3) of this section, the Information Statement described in paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of this section must be filed with the decedent's federal estate tax return. The Information Statement must be signed under penalties of perjury by both the executor of the decedent's estate and by the surviving spouse of the decedent (or by the legal representative of the surviving spouse if the surviving spouse is legally incompetent to sign the statement). The Statement must contain all of the information prescribed by this paragraph (c)(5).

(ii) Annuity source information -

(A) Employment-related annuity. If the nonassignable annuity or other payment is employment-related, the following information must be provided -

(1) The name and address of the employer;

(2) The date of retirement or other separation from employment of the decedent;

(3) The name and address of the pension fund, insurance company, or other obligor that is paying the annuity (or similar payment); and

(4) The identification number, if any, that the obligor has assigned to the annuity or other payment.

(B) Annuity not employment-related. If the nonassignable annuity or other payment is not employment-related, the following information must be provided -

(1) The name and address of the person or entity paying the nonassignable annuity or other payment;

(2) The date of acquisition of the nonassignable annuity contract by the decedent or by the decedent and the surviving spouse; and

(3) The identification number, if any, that the obligor has assigned to the nonassignable annuity or other payment.

(iii) The total annuity amount payable each year. The total amount payable annually under the nonassignable annuity or other arrangement, including a description of whether the annuity is payable monthly, quarterly, or at some other interval, and a description of any scheduled changes in the annuity payout amount.

(iv) The duration of the annuity. A description of the term of the nonassignable annuity or other payment in years, if it is determined by a term certain, and the name, address, and birthdate of any measuring life if the nonassignable annuity or other payment is determined by one or more lives.

(v) The market interest rate under section 7520. The applicable interest rate as determined under section 7520.

(vi) Determination of corpus portion of each payment (in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) of this section). The following items are required in order to determine the corpus portion of each payment -

(A) The present value of the nonassignable annuity or other payment as of the decedent's death;

(B) The expected annuity term;

(C) The corpus amount of the annual annuity payments (paragraph (c)(5)(vi)(A) of this section divided by paragraph (c)(5)(vi)(B) of this section); and

(D) The corpus portion of the annual payments (paragraph (c)(5)(vi)(C) of this section divided by the total amount payable annually).

(vii) Recipient QDOT. In the case of an agreement to rollover under paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the following must be provided -

(A) The name and address of the trustee of the QDOT who is the U.S. Trustee; and

(B) The name and taxpayer identification number of the QDOT.

(viii) Certification statement. The executor of the decedent's estate and the surviving spouse of the decedent (or the legal representative of the surviving spouse if the surviving spouse is legally incompetent to so certify) must each sign a Certification Statement as follows:

Under penalties of perjury, I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information reported in this Information Statement is true, correct and complete.

(6) Agreement to pay section 2056A estate tax -

(i) Payment of section 2056A estate tax. The tax payable under paragraph (c)(2) of this section is payable on an annual basis, commencing in the calendar year following the calendar year of the receipt by the surviving spouse of the spouse's first annuity payment. Form 706QDT and the payment are due on April 15th of each year following the calendar year in which an annuity payment is received except that, in the year of the deceased spouse's death, the Form 706-QDT and the payment are not due prior to the due date, including extensions, for filing the deceased spouse's estate tax return, or if no return is filed, no later than 9 months from the date of the deceased spouse's death; and, in the year of the surviving spouse's death, the Form 706-QDT must be filed and the payment made no later than 9 months from the date of the surviving spouse's death. See § 20.2056A-11 for extensions of time for filing Form 706-QDT and paying the section 2056A estate tax.

(ii) Agreement. In order for a nonassignable annuity or other payment described in this paragraph (c) to qualify under paragraph (c)(2) of this section, the executor of the decedent's estate must file with the estate tax return the following Agreement To Pay Section 2056A Estate Tax, which must be signed by the surviving spouse of the decedent (or by the surviving spouse's legal representative if the surviving spouse is legally incompetent to sign the agreement):

I [ name ] hereby agree that I will report all annuity payments received under the [name of plan or arrangement] on Form 706-QDT for the calendar year and remit, on an annual basis, to the Internal Revenue Service the estate tax that is imposed under section 2056A(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code on the corpus portion of each annuity payment (as defined in § 20.2056A-4(c)(4) of the Estate Tax Regulations) received under the plan during the calendar year. I also agree that Form 706-QDT is to be filed no later than April 15th of the year following the calendar year in which any annuity payments are received except that: in the case of annuity payments received in the year of my spouse's death, Form 706-QDT and the payment shall not be due prior to the due date, including extensions, for filing my spouse's estate tax return or, if no return is filed, no later than 9 months from the date of my spouse's death (except if I am granted an extension of time to file Form 706-QDT under the provisions of § 20.2056A-11); and in the year of my death, the Form 706-QDT must be filed and the payment made no later than the date my estate tax return is filed (or if no return is filed, no later than 9 months from the date of my death). I further agree that if I fail to timely file Form 706-QDT or to timely pay the tax imposed on the corpus portion of any annuity payment (determined after any extensions of time to pay granted to me under the provisions of § 20.2056A- 11), I may become immediately liable to pay the amount of the tax determined by application of section 2056A(b)(1) on the entire remaining present value of the annuity, calculated as of the beginning of the year in which the payment was received with respect to which I failed to timely pay the tax or failed to timely file the return. However, I may make an application for relief under § 301.9100-1 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations, from the consequences of failing to timely file the Form 706-QDT or failing to timely pay the tax on the corpus portion. [The following sentence is applicable only in cases where the plan or arrangement is established and administered by a person or an entity that is located outside of the United States.] I agree, at the request of the District Director, [or the Assistant Commissioner (International) in the case of a surviving spouse of a nonresident noncitizen decedent or a surviving spouse of a United States citizen who died domiciled outside the United States] to enter into a security agreement to secure my undertakings under this agreement.

(7) Agreement to roll over annuity payments -

(i) Roll over of corpus portion. Beginning in the calendar year of the receipt by the surviving spouse of the spouse's first annuity payment, the corpus portion of each annuity payment, as determined under paragraph (c)(4) of this section, must, within 60 days of receipt, be transferred to a QDOT. In addition, all annuity payments received during the calendar year must be reported on Form 706-QDT no later than April 15th of the year following the year in which the annuity payments are received, except that in the year of the surviving spouse's death, the Form 706-QDT must be filed no later than the date the estate tax return is filed (or if no return is filed, no later than 9 months from the date of the surviving spouse's death). See § 20.2056A-11 for extensions of time for filing Form 706-QDT.

(ii) Agreement. In order for a nonassignable annuity or other payment described in this paragraph (c) to qualify under paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the executor of the decedent's estate must file with the estate tax return the following Agreement To Roll Over Annuity Payments, which must be signed by the surviving spouse of the decedent (or by the legal representative of the surviving spouse if the surviving spouse is legally incompetent to sign the agreement):

I [ name ] hereby agree that within 60 days of receipt of each annuity payment paid under the [name of plan or arrangement], I will transfer an amount equal to ___ percent (the corpus portion determined under § 20.2056A-4(c)(4) of the Estate Tax Regulations) of each annuity payment to [identify the QDOT]. Further, I will report all annuity payments received during the calendar year under the [name of plan or arrangement] on Form 706-QDT including a schedule of transfers to the [identify the QDOT]. I also agree that Form 706-QDT is to be filed no later than April 15th of the year following the year in which any annuity payments are received except that: in the case of annuity payments received in the year of my spouse's death, Form 706-QDT shall not be due prior to the due date, including extensions, for filing my spouse's estate tax return, or, if no return is filed, no later than 9 months from the date of my spouse's death (except if I am granted an extension of time to file Form 706-QDT under the provisions of § 20.2056A-11); and in the year of my death, the Form 706-QDT must be filed no later than the date my estate tax return is filed (or if no return is filed, no later than 9 months from the date of my death), and except if I am granted an extension of time to file Form 706-QDT under the provisions of § 20.2056A-11. I further agree that if I fail to timely transfer any required amount with respect to any annuity payment, or fail to timely file Form 706-QDT reporting the transfers for any year, I may become immediately liable to pay the amount of the tax determined by application of section 2056A(b)(1) on the entire remaining present value of the annuity, calculated as of the beginning of the year in which the payment was received with respect to which I failed to make the timely transfer or timely file a return. However, I may make an application for relief under § 301.9100-1 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations, from the consequences of failing to timely file Form 706-QDT or failing to timely transfer the corpus portion of any annuity payment to the QDOT. [The following sentence is applicable only in cases where the plan or arrangement is established and administered by a person or an entity that is located outside of the United States.] I agree, at the request of the District Director [or the Assistant Commissioner (International) in the case of a surviving spouse of a nonresident noncitizen decedent or a surviving spouse of a United States citizen who died domiciled outside the United States] to enter into a security agreement to secure my undertakings under this agreement.

(d) Examples. The provisions of this section are illustrated by the following examples. In each of the following examples the decedent, D, a citizen of the United States, died after August 22, 1995, and D's surviving spouse, S, is not a United States citizen at the time of D's death.

Example 1. Transfer and assignment of probate and nonprobate property to QDOT,
(i) S is the beneficiary of the following probate and nonprobate assets included in D's gross estate:
Pecuniary bequest under will $400,000 200,000 300,000 100,000$1,000,000
(ii) Before the estate tax return for D's estate is filed and before the date that the QDOT election must be made, S creates a QDOT pursuant to which all income is payable to S for life and the remainder is distributable to S's children. S retains a power of appointment over the disposition of the remainder to ensure that S does not make an immediate gift of the remainder of the trust. Also, before the estate tax return is filed and before the date that the QDOT election must be made, S transfers the life insurance proceeds and the specifically devised real property to the QDOT. S decides not to transfer the property that had been jointly owned to the QDOT. Because S has not received distribution of the pecuniary bequest before D's estate tax return is filed and before the date that the QDOT election must be made, S irrevocably assigns the interest in the pecuniary bequest to the QDOT. Assume that the pecuniary bequest is in fact transferred by S to the QDOT before the estate administration is concluded. D's executor makes a QDOT election on the estate tax return for the $700,000 in property that S has transferred and assigned to the QDOT. A marital deduction of$700,000 is allowed to D's estate assuming the estate tax return is filed and the QDOT election is made within the time limitation prescribed in § 20.2056A-3(a). No marital deduction is allowed for the $300,000 interest in jointly-owned property not transferred to the QDOT. Example 2. Formula assignment, Under the terms of D's will, the entire probate estate passes outright to S. Prior to the date D's estate tax return is filed and before the date that the QDOT election must be made, S establishes a QDOT and S executes an irrevocable assignment in which S assigns to the QDOT, “that portion of the gross estate necessary to reduce the estate tax to zero, taking into account all available credits and deductions.” The assignment meets the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, assuming that the QDOT is funded by the time that administration of D's estate is completed. Example 3. Jointly owned property, At the time of D's death, D and S hold real property as joint tenants with right of survivorship. In accordance with section 2056(d)(1)(B), section 2040(a), and § 20.2056A-8(a), 60 percent of the value of the property is included in D's gross estate. S establishes a QDOT and, prior to the date the estate tax return is filed and before the date that the QDOT election must be made, S transfers a 60 percent interest in the real property to the QDOT. The transfer satisfies the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section. Example 4. Computation of corpus portion of annuity payment, (i) At the time of D's death on or after May 1, 2009, D is a participant in an employees' pension plan described in section 401(a). On D's death, D's spouse S, a resident of the United States, becomes entitled to receive a survivor's annuity of$72,000 per year, payable monthly, for life. At the time of D's death, S is age 60. Assume that under section 7520, the appropriate discount rate to be used for valuing annuities in the case of this decedent is 6.0 percent. The annuity factor at 6.0 percent for a person age 60 is 11.0625 (1.000000 minus .33625, divided by .06). The adjustment factor at 6.0 percent in Table K for monthly payments is 1.0272. Accordingly, the right to receive $72,000 per year on a monthly basis is equal to the right to receive$73,958.40 ($72,000 × 1.0272) on an annual basis. (ii) The corpus portion of each annuity payment received by S is determined as follows. The first step is to determine the annuity factor for the number of years that would be required to exhaust a hypothetical fund that has a present value and a payout corresponding to S 's interest in the payments under the plan, determined as follows: (A) Present value of S 's annuity:$73,958.40 × 11.0625 = $818,164.80. (B) Annuity Factor for Expected Annuity Term:$818,164.80/$73,958.40 = 11.0625. (iii) The second step is to determine the number of years that would be required for S 's annuity to exhaust a hypothetical fund of$818,164.80. The term certain annuity factor of 11.0625 falls between the annuity factors for 18 and 19 years in a 6.0 percent term certain annuity table (Column 1 of Table B, Publication 1457 Actuarial Valuations Version 3A, which may be obtained on the IRS Internet site). Accordingly, the expected annuity term is 19 years.

(iv) The third step is to determine the corpus amount by dividing the expected term of 19 years into the present value of the hypothetical fund as follows:

(A) Corpus amount of annual payment: $818,164.80/19 =$43,061.31.

(B) [Reserved]

(v) In the fourth step, the corpus portion of each annuity payment is determined by dividing the corpus amount of each annual payment by the annual annuity payment (adjusted for payments more frequently than annually as in (i) of this Example 4) as follows:

(A) Corpus portion of each annuity payment: $43,061.31/$73,958.40 = .58.

(B) [Reserved]

(vi) Accordingly, 58 percent of each payment to S is deemed to be a distribution of corpus. A marital deduction is allowed for $818,164.80, the present value of the annuity as of D's date of death, if either: S agrees to roll over the corpus portion of each payment to a QDOT and the executor files the Information Statement described in paragraph (c)(5) of this section and the Roll Over Agreement described in paragraph (c)(7) of this section; or S agrees to pay the tax due on the corpus portion of each payment and the executor files the Information Statement described in paragraph (c)(5) of this section and the Payment Agreement described in paragraph (c)(6) of this section. Example 5. Transfer to QDOT subject to gift tax. D's will bequeaths$700,000 outright to S, The bequest qualifies for a marital deduction under section 2056(a) except that it does not pass in a QDOT. S creates an irrevocable trust that meets the requirements for a QDOT and transfers the $700,000 to the QDOT. The QDOT instrument provides that S is entitled to all the income from the QDOT payable at least annually and that, upon the death of S, the property remaining in the QDOT is to be distributed to the grandchildren of D and S in equal shares. The trust instrument contains all other provisions required to qualify as a QDOT. On D's estate tax return, D's executor makes a QDOT election under section 2056A(a)(3). Solely for purposes of the marital deduction, the property is deemed to pass from D to the QDOT. D's estate is entitled to a marital deduction for the$700,000 value of the property passing from D to S. S's transfer of property to the QDOT is treated as a gift of the remainder interest for gift tax purposes because S's transfer creates a vested remainder interest in the grandchildren of D and S. Accordingly, as of the date that S transfers the property to the QDOT, a gift tax is imposed on the present value of the remainder interest. See § 25.2702-1(c)(8) of this chapter exempting S's transfer from the special valuation rules contained in section 2702. At S's death, S is treated as the transferor of the property into the trust for estate tax and generation-skipping transfer tax purposes. See, e.g., sections 2036 and 2652(a)(1). The trust is not eligible for a reverse QTIP election by D's estate under section 2652(a)(3) because a QTIP election cannot be made for the QDOT. This is so because the marital deduction is allowed under section 2056(a) for the outright bequest to the spouse and the spouse is then separately treated as the transferor of the property to the QDOT.

(e) Effective/applicability date. Paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(B) and Example 4 in paragraph (d) of this section are applicable with respect to decedents dying on or after May 1, 2009.

[T.D. 8612, 60 FR 43541, Aug. 22, 1995, as amended by T.D. 8819, 64 FR 23229, Apr. 30, 1999; 64 FR 33196, June 22, 1999; T.D. 9448, 74 FR 21510, May 7, 2009; T.D. 9540, 76 FR 49637, Aug. 10, 2011]


text:
In this tutorial, we are going to build some predictive models from "scratch". That is, without the help of a Python library specifically build for prediction. Such libraries will be the topic of the next few weeks of the course.

We are going to, as usual, build our models using data from Wikipedia. You will grab links from a specific starting page to build a small corpus of items. Then, from these pages, you will consider two prediction tasks:

• how many internal links does the page have? (regression)
• is the page translated into German (classification)

I will help you process the input data. Your task is to build the predictive models and assess how well the perform on the dataset.

We will make use of the three class modules, as well as numpy:

In [1]:
import wiki
import iplot
import wikitext

import numpy as np

In [2]:
assert wiki.__version__ >= 6
assert wikitext.__version__ >= 2
assert iplot.__version__ >= 3

### Get some data¶

For today, make sure that you download the following data. Uncomment the line, run it, and then recomment it so that it only runs once.

In [3]:
#wiki.bulk_download('philosophy', force=True)

For today, we will take all of the pages referenced on the "important publications in philosophy" page to build a corpus for prediction. We will make a WikiCorpus object to simplify the computation of metrics for the page.

In [4]:
np.random.seed(0)

In [5]:
wcorp = wikitext.WikiCorpus(links, num_clusters=15, num_topics=15)

### Building training and testing data¶

Let's now extract the number of internal links on each page, whether the page is translated into German ('de'), and five predictor variables that we will try to use in constructing our models.

In [6]:
num_ilinks = wcorp.meta['num_ilinks'].values
lan_version = np.array(['de' in x for x in wcorp.meta['langs']], dtype=np.int)

num_sections = wcorp.meta['num_sections'].values
num_images = wcorp.meta['num_images'].values
num_langs = wcorp.meta['num_langs'].values
num_chars = np.array([len(x) for x in wcorp.meta['doc'].values])

Now, we will consider the first 325 observations the "training" set and the rest of the data (about the same amount) as the "testing" set. To split these out, we could use something like this:

In [7]:
y_train = num_ilinks[:325]
x_train = num_images[:325]
x_test  = num_images[325:]

You'll need to redefine these depending on the classification task.

## Model I: Linear Regression¶

The first model we will try to build is a linear regression. This is an easy place to start because you have already seen regression models, however now we won't be using the statsmodels module to help us construct the output. Recall that a simple linear regression predicts the response $y$ from a variable $x$ accoring to:

$$y = a + b \cdot x$$

For some parameters $a$ and $b$. We want to find values for these two parameters such that the sum of absolute values is minimized:

$$\sum_i | y_i - (a + b \cdot x_i) |$$

We could optimize this using some fancy algorithm. Today we will start by using trial-and-error on various values of $a$ and $b$.

Start by constructing a function linreg_model_eval that takes inputs $x$, $y$, $a$, and $b$ and returns the sum of absolute errors using these as the intercept and slope terms to predict $y$ from $x$.

In [8]:
def linreg_model_eval(x, y, a, b):
return np.sum(np.abs(y - (a + b* x)))

Now, build a function called linreg_model_best_params that takes as input $x$ and $y$ and returns the best guess for the slope and intercept. You can use the function np.linspace(0, 10, num=100) to generate a range of guesses for the slope and intercept (this would find 100 numbers between 0 and 1). I suggest letting the intercept range from -200 to 200 and the slope from -100 to 100 with about 200-1000 guesses in each. If you find that a result gives an extreme value, try adjusting the range. Remember that you can return two values by seperating them with a comma (i.e., return a, b).

In [9]:
def linreg_model_best_params(x, y):
best_params = dict(error = float("inf"))
for a in np.linspace(-5000, 200, num=1000):
for b in np.linspace(-200, 200, num=1000):
error = linreg_model_eval(x, y, a, b)
if error < best_params['error']:
best_params['error'] = error
best_params['a'] = a
best_params['b'] = b

return best_params['a'], best_params['b']

If you are stuck on the above task, here's a sketch as to how to do this. You need to start with a double for loop cycling over all the values and for each returning how good the fit is. That should be relatively straightforward. From there, I suggest storing a value lowest_abs that keeps track of the best prediction value so far and using an if statement to update the final a and b when this is improved on by a particular model.

Now, apply your regression model using the five predictor variables. Print out how well the model performs on the training and testing set (I'll leave it to you to figure how how to write this code).

In [10]:
x_vars = dict(num_sections=num_sections, num_images=num_images, num_elinks=num_elinks,
num_langs=num_langs, num_chars=num_chars)

for key, val in x_vars.items():

a, b = linreg_model_best_params(val[:325], y_train)
err = linreg_model_eval(val[325:], y_test, a, b)

print("{0:12s}:  a = {1: 10.02f}, b ={2: 7.01f}, err ={3: 8.0f}".format(key, a, b, err))

num_sections:  a =      38.64, b =   19.0, err =   94047
num_images  :  a =      75.08, b =   37.8, err =   79263
num_elinks  :  a =     132.33, b =    7.0, err =   94168
num_langs   :  a =      95.90, b =    9.4, err =   86372
num_chars   :  a =   -2121.52, b =    0.2, err = 1058439

Describe the results about which metric seems the most predictive. Do the results tell us about how Wikipedia represents knowledge?

Answer: The most predictive variable is the number of images.

## Model II: Best Split Regression¶

Our second model mimics the one that I built in Tutorial 22, but with a bit more room for generalization. Here, we will have three parameters: alpha, a, and b. And the model will be given by:

$$\widehat{y} = \begin{cases} a, & x \leq \alpha \\ b, & caps > \alpha \end{cases}$$

So, we have not hard coded what the two values are on either side of the split. We will need slightly different functions for the classification and regression tasks. Let's start with regression (I think it should be a bit easier to write).

Write a function splitreg_model_eval that returns the sum of absolute errors for the model.

In [11]:
def splitreg_model_eval(x, y, alpha, a, b):
y_hat = np.ones_like(y) * a
y_hat[x > alpha] = b

return np.sum(np.abs(y - y_hat))

Now, as before, we want a function splitreg_model_best_params that takes just the data and returns the best parameters. Here there will be three outputs. To do this, use np.linspace again to cycle over values for alpha, but you should set $a$ and $b$ equal to the median of the data split by the cut off alpha. Something like this should work: np.median(x[x > alpha]). Also, you should let alpha range from np.min(x) to np.max(x).

In [12]:
def splitreg_model_best_params(x, y):
best_params = dict(error = float("inf"))
for alpha in np.linspace(np.min(x), np.max(x), num=100, endpoint=False)[1:]:
a = np.median(y[x <= alpha])
b = np.median(y[x > alpha])
error = splitreg_model_eval(x, y, alpha, a, b)

if error < best_params['error']:
best_params['error'] = error
best_params['alpha'] = alpha
best_params['a'] = a
best_params['b'] = b

return best_params['alpha'], best_params['a'], best_params['b']

Now, apply this to each predictor variable and determine which is the best (again, I leave the method for doing this up to you).

In [13]:
y_train = num_ilinks[:325]
num_langs=num_langs, num_chars=num_chars)

for key, val in x_vars.items():

alpha, a, b = splitreg_model_best_params(val[:325], y_train)
err = splitreg_model_eval(val[325:], y_test, alpha, a, b)

print("{0:12s}:  alpha = {1: 8.02f} a ={2: 3.02f}, b ={3: 7.01f}, err ={4: 7.0f}".format(key, alpha, a, b, err))

num_sections:  alpha =    18.96 a = 189.00, b =  678.0, err =  99621
num_images  :  alpha =     4.24 a = 97.00, b =  508.5, err =  92836
num_elinks  :  alpha =    34.76 a = 192.00, b =  672.0, err =  94227
num_langs   :  alpha =    33.48 a = 193.00, b =  711.0, err =  90007
num_chars   :  alpha =  22653.30 a = 232.00, b =  781.5, err =  98818

Which is most predictive? Is this different than your results above? Which estimator is a better predictor and why do you think this?

## Model III: Best Split Classification¶

Using a best split value for classification is similar to the regression case; it just uses a different evaluation function that returns the percentage of pages correctly classified. Write your evaluation function for this here:

In [14]:
def splitclass_model_eval(x, y, alpha, a, b):
y_hat = np.ones_like(y) * a
y_hat[x > alpha] = b

return np.mean(y != y_hat)

Then, define a function that returns the best parameters. This should be exactly the same as splitreg_model_best_params with the new evaluation function switched out.

In [15]:
def splitclass_model_best_params(x, y):
best_params = dict(error = float("inf"))
for alpha in np.linspace(np.min(x)+0.1, np.max(x)-0.1, num=100, endpoint=False):
a = np.median(y[x <= alpha])
b = np.median(y[x > alpha])
error = splitclass_model_eval(x, y, alpha, a, b)

if error < best_params['error']:
best_params['error'] = error
best_params['alpha'] = alpha
best_params['a'] = a
best_params['b'] = b

return best_params['alpha'], best_params['a'], best_params['b']

Test this function using the five predictor variables to predict the variable lan_version, whether the page has a German language version.

In [16]:
y_train = lan_version[:325]
y_test  = lan_version[325:]
num_langs=num_langs, num_chars=num_chars)

for key, val in x_vars.items():

alpha, a, b = splitclass_model_best_params(val[:325], y_train)
err = splitclass_model_eval(val[325:], y_test, alpha, a, b)

print("{0:12s}:  alpha ={1: 10.02f} a ={2: 3.02f}, b ={3: 3.01f}, err ={4: 0.04f}".format(key, alpha, a, b, err))

num_sections:  alpha =      7.99 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.2972
num_images  :  alpha =      2.21 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.2642
num_elinks  :  alpha =     12.73 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.2712
num_langs   :  alpha =     11.25 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.1792
num_chars   :  alpha =   4062.79 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.2547

### More Practice¶

If you manage to finish the above tasks before the end of the class, wrap up one more function that takes two inputs: wcorp and a language code. It should print out (it doesn't need to return anything) information about each of the best splits for predicting the language codes for each of the predictor variables. Note that you may want to make use of the format method I used in Tutorial 22. Try running the function for several languages, and perhaps even a different starting page. See if you start to notice anything interesting.

In [17]:
def predict_lang(wcorp, lang="de"):
lan_version = np.array([lang in x for x in wcorp.meta['langs']], dtype=np.int)

num_sections = wcorp.meta['num_sections'].values
num_images = wcorp.meta['num_images'].values
num_langs = wcorp.meta['num_langs'].values
num_chars = np.array([len(x) for x in wcorp.meta['doc'].values])

y_train = lan_version[:325]
y_test  = lan_version[325:]
num_langs=num_langs, num_chars=num_chars)

for key, val in x_vars.items():

alpha, a, b = splitclass_model_best_params(val[:325], y_train)
err = splitclass_model_eval(val[325:], y_test, alpha, a, b)

print("{0:12s}:  alpha ={1: 10.02f} a ={2: 3.02f}, b ={3: 3.01f}, err ={4: 0.04f}".format(key, alpha, a, b, err))

In [18]:
predict_lang(wcorp, "uk")

num_sections:  alpha =     11.15 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.2854
num_images  :  alpha =      5.38 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.2406
num_elinks  :  alpha =     34.84 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.2877
num_langs   :  alpha =     20.54 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.1297
num_chars   :  alpha =  18669.67 a = 0.00, b = 1.0, err = 0.3066

format: plain


text:
### Home > ACC6 > Chapter 2 Unit 10 > Lesson CC2: 2.2.4 > Problem2-82

2-82.

Copy and complete each of the portions webs below.

1. How can $0.45$ be represented as a fraction or percent?

Recall various conversion rules to find different ways to represent each value.

1. See part (a).

$1.27$, One and twenty-seven hundredths


text:
# nLab empty subset

Given a set $A$, the empty subset of $A$, denoted $\empty_A$, is the subset of $A$ defined by the property that, for every element $x$ of $A$, it is false that $x$ belongs to $\empty_A$.

The underlying set (or shadow) of any empty subset is the empty set. That is, if we interpret $\empty_A$ as an injective function $S \hookrightarrow A$, then the source $S$ of this function is the empty set.

In the usual framework of material set theory, every empty subset is identical to the empty set. For this reason, it is common to write simply $\empty$ instead of $\empty_A$. Even from a structural perspective, this is an abuse of language that is unlikely to cause any confusion.

Created on March 20, 2010 19:36:46 by Toby Bartels (75.88.69.30)


text:
How do you simplify log 4 + log 5 - log 2?

To answer this question, the following logarithm rules are needed:
loga+logb = log(a*b)
loga - logb = log(a/b)
log_b b = 1

Using the above rules:
log4 + log5 - log2
=log((4*5)/2)
= log(20/2)
= log(10)
Since the base of a normal log is 10, log10 = 1 (come 10^1 = 10).


text:
Difficult integration by parts

1. Aug 3, 2013

hoeranski

1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

Calculate the following integral with partial integration:

$$\int\frac{1 - x}{(x^2 + 2x + 3)^2}dx$$

3. The attempt at a solution

I guess you need to write the integral in easier chunks but I still fail every time.

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 3, 2013
2. Aug 3, 2013

sjb-2812

Can you write this as partial fractions? or make use of the fact that the bottom can be factorised?

3. Aug 3, 2013

verty

I haven't tried this but letting u = 1/(x^2 + 2x + 3) may get you somewhere.

Sorry, I've checked this now and it doesn't work. Another angle of attack, probably not the best method though, is u = x + b/2a = x + 1.

Last edited: Aug 3, 2013
4. Aug 3, 2013

verty

Making the substitution I suggested (u = x + 1), one gets this:

$\int{\frac{2-u}{(2+u^2)^2}} du$

Then, one has a choice of substitutions (tan, cot, sinh). By inspection, sinh won't work. We then have denominator cosh^3, not nice. That leaves tan and cot although it seems tan is never a worse substitution than cot. I hold out hope but... use tan and...

Best of luck.

PS. Given the nature of this question, I can offer no further help. A difficult question is meant to be difficult.

5. Aug 3, 2013

HallsofIvy

Staff Emeritus
With a quadratic that cannot be factored (using real numbers) in the denominator, the standard step is to complete the square: $x^3+ 2x+ 3= x^2+ 2x+ 1+ 2= (x+ 1)^2+ 2$ so you can write the integral as $$\int\frac{1- x}{((x+1)^2+ 2)^3}dx$$.

Now let t= x+ 1 so that dx= dt and 1- x= 2-(x+1)= 2- t. With that substitution, the integral becomes
$$\int\frac{2- t}{(t^2+ 2)^2}dt= 2\int\frac{dt}{(t^2+ 2)^2}- \frac{t}{(t^2+ 2)^2}dt$$
For the first integral try $$t= \sqrt{2}tan(\theta)$$ and for the second, $$u= t^2+ 2$$.

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 3, 2013
6. Aug 3, 2013

Millennial

Another way to tackle the integral could be to somehow create the derivative of the base for the exponent in the denominator in the numerator. Then, you could use substitution.

7. Aug 3, 2013

lurflurf

^That is pretty much what they did
$$\frac{1-x}{(x^2+2x+3)^2}=\frac{2-(x^2+2x+3)^\prime /2}{(x^2+2x+3)^2}$$
then we need to split it into two parts otherwise we need to use complex numbers


text:
# Trojan Asteriod

Asteroid (or satellite) that orbits a body at one of the Lagrange points 60º ahead (L4) or behind (L5) a secondary body. Although Trojan asteroids have been discovered for Mars (5, all at L5) and Neptune (2), the term generally refers to the ~1800 asteroids accompanying Jupiter (~60% at L4). Although the Trojans are stabilized at the Lagrangian points by gravitational interactions with Jupiter and the Sun, their actual distribution is elongated along the orbit. Perturbations from other planets (primarily Saturn) cause the Trojans to oscillate around L4 and L5 by 15-20° and inclinations up to 40° to the orbital plane. These oscillations generally take 150-200 years to complete. The absence of Trojans at the Lagrangian points of Saturn most likely results from Jupiter removing them from these stable orbits through gravitational perturbations. Other examples of Trojan bodies in the solar system include daughter satellites that orbit in the Trojan points of the Saturn-Tethys system, and an additional satellite (Helene) which orbits in the forward Trojan point of Saturn and Dione.

Image source: http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/astro/cosmos/T/Trojan+Asteroids.

This entry was posted in . Bookmark the permalink.


text:
# Does Might Ever Make Right?

1. Apr 26, 2004

### Les Sleeth

If one has the power to make a decision which affects others, is one always obligated to consider what is "right"? Can someone claim, for instance, one's superior ability in some area exempts one from having to explain oneself? If someone has managed to get to the top of a situation (political, athletic, business, social, etc.) can't he/she claim superior ability justifies the decisions he/she makes (i.e., "I wouldn't be at the top if I didn't know better than you)? Some may also ask, "if I've managed to get more power than you, doesn't that give me certain rights you are not entitled to?"

Finally, if "might" should not determine who makes the rules, then what is the basis of "rightness"?

Last edited: Apr 26, 2004
2. Apr 27, 2004

### Dissident Dan

You ask several different questions here. The first part isn't about "might makes right", but someone claiming expertise...sort of a "you won't understand (or I don't want to take the time to explain)" argument. This is just asking someone to trust you. Personally, granting this trust would vary with person and with the issue at hand. I am fearful of blind trust. I don't think that anyone could be so much smarter than I that I would not be able to comprehend a person's reasons. Even the smartest of us need checks. "Just trust us" is the slogan of intrusive governments. Abilities wouldn't be my only factor for granting trust, but also what are called character traits.

Might definitely does not make right. The basis of "rightness" goes down to the very basis of ethics. The whole idea of ethics/morality disappears if "might makes right", because you cannot make a judgment, because if it is happening, then it must be right. The whole of idea of ethics rests on the premise that some things aren't acceptable. As for the basis of ethics, some would use religious arguments. Some would use others. Some would use my argument.

I say that the whole idea of right or wrong should derive from the idea of good or bad. And the only things that are truly good or bad are pleasure (good) and suffering (bad).

3. Apr 27, 2004

### Stevo

The argument "Trust me, I know better than you" is fallacious. If the reasoning behind a decision is sound, then you should be able to provide evidence. Appealling to confidence is not sound reasoning.

4. Apr 27, 2004

The natural-selection value of war

• 5.7 The Functions of War and the Development of a Functional
Substitute

...one could argue that the outcome of war on the whole is likely to favor the more competent culture and thus effect a general advance.

5. Apr 27, 2004

Not sure if i am reading your mind, or its just my present concern over the Iraq situation. Use it as a modern example. Its out of control. If the USA has the power to make a decision which affects others, is the President, always obligated to consider what is "right"? The UN voted against the war and USA made there own decision. We know today that it was not worth it, as the reasons will never be validated. The Roman Catholic Church tried to convert the world through "Ecumenism" and look where it lead to, disaster. George W. Bush will not convet Islam either by Ecumenical Democracy. What is the basis of "rightness"? using ethics and moral standards.

6. Apr 27, 2004

### confutatis

But too much pleasure usually ends up in suffering, doesn't it? What good is a life wasted on a meaningless pursuit of pleasure for its own sake?

I think it all boils down to good and bad, but there must be more to good than just pleasure. I think some amount of suffering is not only inevitable, but actually desirable, as it's suffering that gives meaning to everything else we perceive as good. No pain, no gain.

7. Apr 27, 2004

### olde drunk

"RIGHT" as understood by the current administration was based on misguided christian zeal. unfortunately, they also had the might to act on their delusion.

hopefully this will be the straw that breaks the camel's back and we will no longer have a unilateral military action. how many times do we need to go through this (korea, vietnam, etc etc)??

while private interests played a part, i personally believe that they acted in good faith. regardless of the reason any, if not all, military action is never a solution. look at northern ireland, palestine, iraqi sects, etc

war can only acerbate a situation. at best, it is a very poor final solution.

love & peace,
olde drunk

8. Apr 27, 2004

### Les Sleeth

You are correct, what is "right" normally is an ethics question, but I think this concept manages to escape ethics. It seems to be the principle of nature, where the dominant animal gets the rights to breed, first shot at kills, etc. In some past cultures, the dominating ruler had virtual absolute power. The "ethics" of might makes right is power. If you have it, then you deserve to make the rules; moreover, if you have power you can make the rules.

That's an interesting idea, but to agree I'd have to re-characterize your standards as what feels good (which isn't always pleasure) and suffering. One might be able to indulge in sex and eating every waking moment (if one had the resources and metabolism for it) and not suffer much, but still not feel too good inside.

9. Apr 27, 2004

### Les Sleeth

What if were Yoda? What if it is a child who is about to do something that will harm oneself or others and you have the power to stop it?

10. Apr 27, 2004

### Les Sleeth

Exactly what I suspect dominant ruler-types think. Look back to all the conquerers, and then the ruling elite that became established, and they all believed they'd earned the right to make the rules. It seems clear there has been, and still is in some ways, an assumption that if you can dominate you are superior.

Something I've theorized is that since it hasn't really been that long since homo sapians acquired their current level of consciousness, possibly some of the old biological imperatives are still controlling us. In such a case, dominance is something which has carried over from unreflective animal awareness. While it works for biology, once our level of consciousness is attained new interaction rules seem to be needed.

This might sound like a funny reason to post a thread, but what made me think about it is a group of friends I have. We all play racquetball together, and the dominant players tend to feel they deserve priviledges for things like sharing court time, deciding if a shot was good or not during play, etc. I also observe a certain struggle in the group to move up or maintain one's position by dominance. Sometimes thing get pretty heated among players who off the court are good friends. My attempts at getting anyone to see there are mindless dominance issues at work haven't been too successful.

You point, however, that whomever dominates might lead to a better situation seems to determined both by who the players are, and by how one wins. I am very happy the Allies eventually dominated in WWII, or when the police dominate over those involved in criminal activity. But then, the bad guys in those situations are the ones starting it. Then there's contests like elections. There one can observe attempts at dominance too, even though candidates try to appear like they are making their case with reason and not force.

11. Apr 27, 2004

### Les Sleeth

Personally, I think what should determine what is "right" is what works best. I've never seen a case where someone who believes the way things "ought" be can overcome the fact that their idea doesn't work. People seem to need to develop as individuals, for instance, so those cultures that have rules which infringe on the development of individuality seem to cause psychological problems for its citizens. The same is true in business where it's been amply demonstrated empowering employees is far more effective (for the business) than driving them like slaves. Recently I saw a movie (forgot the title, something like the "_______ Sisters"), a true story about how Irish girls would be put in the convent, against their will, to make them "good." Some were kept there until adulthood, or never let out! There you have a great example of the utter stupidity of choosing morality/ethics as the basis of action over the practical question of if conventing girls really is best for them (or society).

One reason I don't think we trust what "works" as much as we should is because we aren't sure if goodness or love or compassion or justice works as well as kicking a, getting what you want regardless of how it affects others, etc. In other words, is what "works" best (both toward establishing wealth and achieving an inner sense of well being), that which we now consider to be the more enlightened qualities of consciousness? All my life experience tells me that enlightened qualities overall yields the most practical course of action.

I think the dominance question is exactly this sort of thing, where we aren't sure if reason is better than just winning by force and then asserting whatever rules one deems best.

12. Apr 27, 2004

### Staff: Mentor

That's it in a nutshell. "Might makes right" is logically flawed and morally wrong. Unquestionably.
That explains a lot about your views on philosophy/morality. A psychologist would disagree with you: humans are far more complicated than that, though animals are not. In fact, it is because humans are more complicated than that that modern civilizations are possible.
Uh oh, LW - that sounds like something I would have said in the 'Got meat?' thread...

Hobbes called it the "state of nature." Its also called "anarchy." I wouldn't necessarily call it "might makes right" because to an animal, "right" is not a concept with any meaning. Having risen above that to create (or discover if you prefer) morality and ethics is what sets us apart from the animals (and even the feudal kings and contemporary warlords) and allowed the creation of modern civilization.
I'm definitely on board with that: our ability to rise above our animal instincts is what makes us different. But we still have those instincts and they do still affect us.

13. Apr 27, 2004

### Angel Loupe

(i.e., "I wouldn't be at the top if I didn't know better than you)? Some may also ask, "if I've managed to get more power than you, doesn't that give me certain rights you are not entitled to?"

This would only apply in a world where everyone was the same age, everyone was focusing on the same career, and there was no such thing as prejudism, discrimination, bribery, etc.
Since we all know that is not the case, I think the answer is that might is not right. The more powerful MOST (not all) humans are, the more warped their judgement becomes and the more they lose sight of what they know to be "right" for the masses. Democracy was supposed to alleviate this problem, with the people collectively making the decisions, but now of course, that, too has been warped, to fit the needs of the mighty...

14. Apr 30, 2004

### quddusaliquddus

Might doesn't make right. All because you can do something doesn'y mean you should be doing it. Otherwise any action would be good and the 'rightness' of an action would be judged by whether it worked or not. Intentions and means-used count.

15. Apr 30, 2004

### Pergatory

Very well-said! Would you decide what "works best"?

I believe the obvious conclusion is that yes, the good of the people as a whole should be one and the same as the good of one person. Therefore a person's actions should not take from others more than if benefits the self. Japanese culture is very far advanced from ours in this sense, in that they tend to consider the welfare of their whole people and not just their self. A Japanese businessman will often work for one company his entire life. This allows the company to expend resources on him that the company will reap in return through the employee's advancement. Everybody wins.

Yet, this is how equalibrium is attained. What many people seek is not an equalibrium, but a position of power. This is where "bad" ideas are introduced, and it is also why any system which controls power will eventually bow to those with corrupt ideals. There is no such thing is a "good government" per se because a government is a system for managing power, which in itself is a flawed endeavor. The only government that will ever work for a long period of time is one that gives every citizen equal power. The current U.S. government operates under the guise of such a "democracy" when really it is a republic. This is just basic psychology, everybody knows we're not all equal, but it sounds nicer to call it a democracy anyway.

16. May 1, 2004

### Dissident Dan

The "what works best" method, as stated, is incomplete. Works best toward what goal? Why is this goal valuable?

17. May 2, 2004

### Les Sleeth

I've just had several pages of debate with Canute on this exact point in the thread "Proof of Reality" in epistomology. If you are interested in more depth than I am going to cover here, you might read that. But . . .

The statement about what "works" is derived from philosophical pragmatism, and my personal observation that that we have emerged from (relatively) fixed universal conditions. For example, immediately surrounding us is biology, and surround thating is nature, and surrounding that is the universe's physics, and some feel surrounding that is something metaphysical.

All these interdependent conditions are either fixed or so established after billions of years of development, they usually can't be changed in a short period of time, or if they can (such as nature) it often results in damage to the overall system. The bottom line then, is that it's usually best to harmonize with such powerful forces, and that includes both in one's behavior and also when designing human systems where the issue of power is important. So when I speak of how something "works," mostly I mean how well it harmonizes with universal or, for life, natural conditions (there are other aspects to philosophical pragmatism discussed in that other thread).

When it comes to humans, evidence something is working is the ease of implementation, duration, and how well the people thrive. History provides plenty of examples of how detrimental to ease, duration and thriving that power abuse can be. That's because power abuse always results in the loss of individual power, and powerless people are rendered ineffective (that's why we imprison criminals). Even in business (where there's been, and still is, lots of power abuse) it's being learned that empowering employees is good for business. If people didn't have a nature, maybe we could treat them any ol' way and they'd still be productive. But that hasn't proven to be true.

So I say, it just doesn't "work" in the long-term to say, if I've got the might, then I get to determine what is right because there are several layers of a much bigger universe which already has lots to say about what is right, and what works.

Last edited: May 2, 2004
18. May 3, 2004

### Dissident Dan

So, there appear to be 2 values:

1) harmony with surroundings
2) thriving

What is "thriving"? Reproducing?

19. May 3, 2004

### Les Sleeth

For a human being, that is quite the philosophical question isn't it. If it were a car, we might say thriving is when the all the parts run smoothly, the car operates as designed, and it endures. But it's interesting too that because of damage to the environment, and using up natural resourses, cars are now seen as working better when they don't pollute and use less fuel. As you can see, those values for a car (design optimization, environment protection, and efficiency) really do harmonize better with the larger environment of physics and nature, which in the long run makes the car work better for us.

A human being is a lot more sophisticated, and there is a lot of debate about what makes us thrive. If you've ever watched Dr. Phil, it's almost frightening to see what some people think proper child rearing or a healthy relationship is. I think children give us some great clues about thriving. Once their food, health, play time and shelter issues are solid, kids thrive in a loving environment with realistic boundaries that encourages them to develop as individuals, teaches them values that de-self-center, and assists them in self-actualization (manifesting talents, skills, healthy desires, etc.).

That seems to "work" best for most of one's life, but some of us later also seem to need to find something deeper to experience in order to thrive. Of course, that's another controversial issue (i.e., whether there is anything "deeper").

20. May 4, 2004

### honestrosewater

Aren't you here asserting your "philosophical might"?
What is the difference between the pen and the sword? The pen is mightier ;)

Happy thoughts
Rachel


text:
# Sound Help

## Recommended Posts

Actually the thing is that i am 2D Designer worked on different softwares like adobe photoshop, and flash mx. my question is related to flash mx. i am using flash mx for building small games as well for developing websites and small applications. So I also put songs, musics and sound effects in flash mx for more interactivity and whenever i want to do it or special sound effects like background music or rollover button sounds. So what i do i import first in Flash MX Library and then i attach That Sound in my fla file. like first I create Object and then attach sound to that object in order to use it later
var mySoundObject:Sound = new Sound()
mySoundObject.attachSound("Instance Name")
mySoundObject.play()

So the point is to be noted here is that when i start importing sounds my file size starts increasing due to storing sounds. I do this kind of thing for privacy so no body can copy my sound files. So Actual Question is i want to put all my sounds in one file like i also saw such things in Games like in FIFA. they put their sound files in one file which actually has extention like .big which contains all sound files to protect their privacy and later in the game they extract their sounds from that file. So how can we make this kind of thing in Flash MX. What i Want to store all the files in one Big File. and then when my swf loads, it starts loading all the sounds from that file in order to use later like in the above script. or is there any software which compress all the sounds like Winzip and winrar do. but zip and rar files are not so secure every person can see. what i want to store my sound files in one file and then i connect through action script. so is this possible in flash mx and if yes how? The same thing i also want to ask for Visual Basic. I creted pin ball game in visual basic with the help of flash objects and active x controls but my forms, sounds, databases and every file is visible and ofcourse hide is not the way to hide the files every one can see and edit the files as well as every one can see the whole script so how can we protect our files. this question is same as the previous one only the difference is that, that question was related to flash mx and this is related to visual basic.

##### Share on other sites
The Lounge is for off-topic discussion, you should be in one of the technical forums. Moving you to... *ponders* ...For Beginners. Please try to choose the appropriate forum when posting.

## Create an account

Register a new account

• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
628383
• Total Posts
2982371

• 10
• 9
• 15
• 24
• 11