It’s About Time: Webb on Fractional Interests in Real Estate
After more than 25 years of valuing nonmarketable interests in real estate, Dennis Webb (Primus Valuations) says that the single most important thing in this type of valuation is “time.”
More on Hitchner’s myth-busting regarding restricted stock
A few weeks ago, we covered the start of Jim Hitchner’s list of BV myths he is out to bust.
ES NPA Holding, LLC v. Comm’r
The Tax Court ruled that the class C units were a profits interest because, when applying the fair market value of the LLC at the time of receipt, the partner would not receive any proceeds from a liquidation at that time. Any proceeds in excess of fair market value would be speculative. No accuracy penalty was appropriate either.
On Liquidation Tax Matters, Partner Would Not Receive Any Proceeds, Interest Received Would Be Nontaxable Profits Interest
The Tax Court ruled that the class C units were a profits interest because, when applying the fair market value of the LLC at the time of receipt, the partner would not receive any proceeds from a liquidation at that time. Any proceeds in excess of fair market value would be speculative. No accuracy penalty was appropriate either.
Hitchner launches a BV myth-busting effort
Some notions have recently been kicking around in the valuation profession that have prompted Jim Hitchner (Financial Valuation Advisors) to speak out.
Big IRS red flag in fractional interest valuations
A discussion of who the partners are and what they are likely to do in the future is an essential part of a valuation of a fractional interest in real estate, advises Dennis Webb (Primus Valuations).
Tax Court (Grudgingly) Allows Tax Affecting Under the SEAM Method
This was a gift tax valuation case the U.S. Tax Court decided. Gifts of minority interests in The Biltmore Co. were made from the its shareholders, the Cecils, to their children and grandchildren. The IRS audited the gift tax returns and assessed deficiencies for reporting too low fair market values of the gifts of The Biltmore Co. stock. Both sides presented experts to value the gifted interests. The experts agreed that the cash flows should be tax affected. The court accepted the tax affecting while allowing that it was not an admission by the Tax Court that tax affecting should apply in all cases. The Tax Court made changes to the values presented and cobbled together a final value that resulted in refunds to the taxpayers/petitioners.
Estate of Cecil v. Comm’r
This was a gift tax valuation case the U.S. Tax Court decided. Gifts of minority interests in The Biltmore Co. were made from the its shareholders, the Cecils, to their children and grandchildren. The IRS audited the gift tax returns and assessed deficiencies for reporting too low fair market values of the gifts of The Biltmore Co. stock. Both sides presented experts to value the gifted interests. The experts agreed that the cash flows should be tax affected. The court accepted the tax affecting while allowing that it was not an admission by the Tax Court that tax affecting should apply in all cases. The Tax Court made changes to the values presented and cobbled together a final value that resulted in refunds to the taxpayers/petitioners.
IRS hits taxpayer with gross valuation misstatement penalty
Easement cases before the Tax Court can offer some interesting insights and guidance to BV professionals.
Brooks v. Comm’r
The IRS disallowed carryover charitable deductions for donation of a conservation easement by taxpayers’ family LLC to the county where the property lies. In addition to the disallowance of the donation deductions, the IRS assessed gross overvaluation penalties. The Tax Court denied the deductions in part for lack of following regulations and procedures. Additionally, the court found that the value determined by the taxpayers’ appraiser was filled with errors and had basic incorrect assumptions resulting in a gross misstatement of value. Thus, taxpayers were liable for the 40% accuracy-related penalty resulting from a gross valuation misstatement pursuant to section 6662(h) as determined for each of the years in issue.
Taxpayer Is Denied Charitable Deduction for a Conservation Easement, and Gross Valuation Misstatement Penalties Are Applied
The IRS disallowed carryover charitable deductions for donation of a conservation easement by taxpayers’ family LLC to the county where the property lies. In addition to the disallowance of the donation deductions, the IRS assessed gross overvaluation penalties. The Tax Court denied the deductions in part for lack of following regulations and procedures. Additionally, the court found that the value determined by the taxpayers’ appraiser was filled with errors and had basic incorrect assumptions resulting in a gross misstatement of value. Thus, taxpayers were liable for the 40% accuracy-related penalty resulting from a gross valuation misstatement pursuant to section 6662(h) as determined for each of the years in issue.
Champions Retreat Golf Founders, LLC v. Comm’r
The Tax Court, on remand from the 11th Circuit, which decided that the taxpayer was entitled to a charitable donation for donation of a conservation easement, now valued that interest to determine the amount of the donation deduction. Both parties presented valuation opinions from expert appraisers. The Tax Court determined that the highest and best use of the property before and after the grant of the easement was the key to the determination of the value of the easement. The Tax Court then analyzed the evidence from the expert appraisals to arrive at a value of the easement.
On Remand, the Tax Court Determines the Value of a Conservation Easement From a Golf Course
The Tax Court, on remand from the 11th Circuit, which decided that the taxpayer was entitled to a charitable donation for donation of a conservation easement, now valued that interest to determine the amount of the donation deduction. Both parties presented valuation opinions from expert appraisers. The Tax Court determined that the highest and best use of the property before and after the grant of the easement was the key to the determination of the value of the easement. The Tax Court then analyzed the evidence from the expert appraisals to arrive at a value of the easement.
District Court Affirms Tax Court’s Decision That Deferred Payments to Spouse Are Not Deductible Alimony Payments
The district court in this appeal from the Tax Court affirmed the Tax Court’s decision that deferred payments the husband made to the wife were not deductible alimony payments and thus not taxable to the wife.
Redleaf v. Comm’r
The district court in this appeal from the Tax Court affirmed the Tax Court’s decision that deferred payments the husband made to the wife were not deductible alimony payments and thus not taxable to the wife.
Couturier v. Comm'r
The Tax Court was asked in this ESOP-related case to approve the taxpayer’s motion for summary judgment. The petitioner contended that the IRS “is precluded as a matter of law from asserting excise tax liability under section 4973” because it did not issue him a notice of deficiency challenging his income tax treatment of the transactions that generated the excess contributions. The motion was denied. The alleged excess contributions were more than $26 million with alleged excise tax of more than $8 million.
Tax Court Denies Taxpayer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Relative to an Excess IRA Contribution Relating to an ESOP Purchase/Sale
The Tax Court was asked in this ESOP-related case to approve the taxpayer’s motion for summary judgment. The petitioner contended that the IRS “is precluded as a matter of law from asserting excise tax liability under section 4973” because it did not issue him a notice of deficiency challenging his income tax treatment of the transactions that generated the excess contributions. The motion was denied. The alleged excess contributions were more than $26 million with alleged excise tax of more than $8 million.
Details start to emerge about the Prince estate valuation
One of the tricky assets to value in the Prince estate was the rock star’s name and likeness.
New IRS Trap for GRATs When There Is a Merger Pending
The Chief Counsel office (IRS) recently released a memorandum, which comes to two primary conclusions. First, under the fair market value standard, the hypothetical willing buyer and willing seller of a company would consider a pending merger when valuing stock for gift tax purposes. Second, the retained interest is not a qualified annuity interest under § 2702 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) because the donor used an outdated appraisal that did not take into account all the facts and circumstances of a pending merger.
Prince estate and IRS settle valuation dispute
The IRS and Comerica Bank and Trust, the administrator of the estate of rock star Prince, have agreed to settle their dispute and agree on an estate value of $156.4 million, according to settlement documents submitted in the case.
The Nelson Tax Court case ‘has it all’
An appellate court recently affirmed the Nelson Tax Court case, which “has it all” in terms of valuation issues, said Barry Sziklay (Friedman LLP) in his session at the New Jersey CPA Society’s Business Valuation and Litigation Services Conference.
More jabs at the proposed billionaire tax
Although it could give a lot of work to appraisers, the proposed billionaire tax is an example of “really bad tax law,” says the dean of valuation, Aswath Damodaran (New York University Stern School of Business).
IRS sending agents to NACVA’s BV training
The IRS is sending 79 agents to business valuation training provided by the National Association of Certified Valuators and Analysts (NACVA), according to former IRS manager Michael Gregory (Michael Gregory Consulting LLC).
Damodaran on proposed billionaire tax
“A boon for appraisers and accountants,” but it is one of the worst tax proposals ever, says Aswath Damodaran (New York University Stern School of Business), in an appearance on CNBC.
Nelson v Commr.
Taxpayer appealed a Tax Court ruling that she gifted a percentage of partnership interests and not a fixed amount of value. As a result, when the IRS determined the FMV of those interests, the Taxpayer was left with a gift tax deficiency.