U.S. Tax Court Denies Motion of IRS for Partial Summary Judgment to Disallow Taxpayer’s Claimed Charitable Deduction

BVLaw
Court Case Digests
October 24, 2024
8221 Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
611310 Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
federal taxation
charitable contribution, appraisal, fair market value (FMV), merger, summary judgment

Barney v. Comm’r.
2024 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 2647
US
Federal Court
Federal
United States Tax Court
Christian N. Weiler

Summary

At the date of this decision, the IRS was becoming more aggressive in enforcing the requirement of Treasury Regulation § 1.170A-13(c)(3)(ii)(D), which required that a qualified appraisal include “the terms of any agreement or understanding entered into … by or on behalf of the donor or donee that relates to the use, sale, or other disposition of the property.” The Tax Court had been taking the position that, where the appraisal contained sufficient information to allow the commissioner to evaluate the contribution, the taxpayer’s substantial compliance will adequately serve the purpose Congress intended. Here the motion for partial summary judgment was denied since “there exists a genuine dispute of material fact precluding summary judgment as to whether (or not) petitioner substantiated his charitable deduction claim with a qualified appraisal.”

See Also

Barney v. Comm'r

At the date of this decision, the IRS was becoming more aggressive in enforcing the requirement of Treasury Regulation § 1.170A-13(c)(3)(ii)(D), which required that a qualified appraisal include “the terms of any agreement or understanding entered into … by or on behalf of the donor or donee that relates to the use, sale, or other disposition of the property.” The Tax Court had been taking the position that, where the appraisal contained sufficient information to allow the commissioner to evaluate the contribution, the taxpayer’s substantial compliance will adequately serve the purpose Congress intended. Here the motion for partial summary judgment was denied since “there exists a genuine dispute of material fact precluding summary judgment as to whether (or not) petitioner substantiated his charitable deduction claim with a qualified appraisal.”