Tax Court Valuation of Public Utility Gets Mixed Marks From State High Court

Business Valuation UpdateVol. 23 No. 3
BVLaw Case Update
March 2017

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
Already a subscriber?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (687 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
4924 Natural Gas Distribution
221210 Natural Gas Distribution
state taxation (incl. ad valorem)
beta, cost approach, expert testimony, income approach, capital asset pricing model (CAPM), build-up method, depreciation, market value, sale of business, company specific risk, capitalization method
Minn. Energy Res. Corp. v. Commissioner of Revenue
2016 Minn. LEXIS 715
November 9, 2016
US
State Court
Minnesota
Supreme Court
Kevin Reilly (taxpayer); Brent Eyre (Commissioner)
Stras

Summary

State Supreme Court says, in valuing public utility, Tax Court had discretion to adopt Commissioner expert’s position on company-specific risk premium and build-up method but failed to explain choice of specific beta factors; Supreme Court remands.

See Also

Tax Court Valuation of Public Utility Gets Mixed Marks From State High Court

Court Case Digests
November 9, 2016

State Supreme Court says, in valuing public utility, Tax Court had discretion to adopt Commissioner expert’s position on company-specific risk premium and build-up method but failed to explain choice of specific beta factors; Supreme Court remands.