It does not though. The NTA can choose to view that act of spending as the moment of receipt/awareness. Thus, triggering liability for the full amount received all at once.
This is the "logical" extension of the "money in the dresser" tax avoidance problem that plagues the NTA. Suddenly having, and spending said funds does not prove anything. Nor does inheriting an account in your name. These were the classic tax-avoidance moves in Japan.
There needs to be a clear establishment of receipt and acknowledgement everytime the gift is given. Otherwise, it can be deemed tax-avoidance.
...
Oh man, I do not like make these arguments. But, this is the rabbit-hole I went down.