It is notable (and thus appears frequently in law school casebooks) for the following holding: The taxpayer-wife sold stock which she had received from her husband, S. S. Kresge, pursuant to an antenuptial agreement, under which she accepted the shares in consideration for surrendering all marital property rights in her husband's estate.

"The problem presented by this petition is to fix the cost basis to be used by the petitioner in determining the taxable gain on a sale she made in 1938 of shares of corporate stock.

But as against the larger Code policy embodied in the gift exclusion--§102 and its corollary, §1015—the cases seem misguided, or at least doubtful, in result.

[2] The presence of a contract obligation, though it otherwise justifies a finding of taxable event, seems insufficient on the whole to remove pre-marital and (much more important) post-marital property arrangements from the ambit of the gift provisions.

Quite obviously, family wealth is being divided between husband and wife in both instances, and it is this circumstance—rather than the presence of "consideration" in Farid or of arm's length dealing in Davis—that ought to govern the tax outcome.