In a California divorce case we recently covered, an appeals court disallowed a discount for possible future taxes because the taxes were neither immediate nor specific. But, in Nebraska, the state’s Supreme Court came to the opposite conclusion. Experts for both sides in that case allowed some amount for the potential future liability of tax for trapped-in gains. But the court never mentioned the issue of immediacy and certainty in allowing the estimated present value of potential future taxes on trapped-in gains.
Read some commentary on these two cases in a blog post by BVR’s legal editor, Jim Alerding. He points out that these two cases exemplify the need to know the law in the jurisdiction of your case.
The Nebraska case is Bohac v. Benes Serv. Co., 310 Neb. 722; 2022 Neb. LEXIS 5, and a case analysis and full opinion are available on the BVLaw platform.