A Nation Getting Older: Valuing Senior Citizen Focused Companies
Join Vanessa Claiborne to learn the latest market trends in senior living, including the impact of the pandemic on value, key valuation metrics, and the short- and long-term outlook for valuations. With discussions on both skilled nursing and senior housing, this event will assist you in practical ways. Don’t miss this distinguished event.
Appellate court KOs unaccrued interest on dissipated assets
In a divorce case, an appellate court vacated the order of the trial court that erroneously charged the husband with over $4 million in unaccrued interest on marital assets that the husband fraudulently dissipated from the marital estate.
Mohen v. Mohen
In the trial court (TC), the wife was awarded $4,360,158 of mostly unaccrued interest on the corpus of trusts the husband set up unilaterally for the children. The TC took the value of those trusts, $9,291,372, as part of the marital estate. The TC also added $990,945 of interest that the trusts had received and the remaining unaccrued future interest for a total value of “distribution” paid to the husband of $14,642,475 related to the trusts. The appellate court (AC) determined that the future interest was future interest and, thus, not part of the marital estate. However, the AC let stand the determination that the value of the trusts were to be treated as a distribution to the husband.
Husband Dissipates Assets by Placing Them in Trusts for the Children, but the Appellate Court Does Not Allow Unaccrued Interest
In the trial court (TC), the wife was awarded $4,360,158 of mostly unaccrued interest on the corpus of trusts the husband set up unilaterally for the children. The TC took the value of those trusts, $9,291,372, as part of the marital estate. The TC also added $990,945 of interest that the trusts had received and the remaining unaccrued future interest for a total value of “distribution” paid to the husband of $14,642,475 related to the trusts. The appellate court (AC) determined that the future interest was future interest and, thus, not part of the marital estate. However, the AC let stand the determination that the value of the trusts were to be treated as a distribution to the husband.
Pandemic Triggers Chances for Valuers in Exit Planning
One of the key takeaways from the recent ENGAGE 2020 conference sponsored by the AICPA was one of particular interest to business valuers. “The pandemic has created some temporary financial planning opportunities,” says Steve Siegel, JD, LLM, president of The Siegel Group. “If you have a client who plans to pass their business along to a child one day—while business values are low, this is a useful time to get a new business appraisal. If you wait, values may recover, and federal tax laws may be less generous to business owners seeking to transfer their interests to family members.”
Estate of Koons v. Commissioner (Koons II)
Affirming FMV conclusion, appeals court says Tax Court did not err in focusing less on details of methodology parties’ appraisers used than on larger issue of whether hypothetical seller would be able to force distribution of majority of LLC’s assets.
Court Finds ‘Market Value Concept’ Requires Flexibility
Court says under Daubert a business valuator is qualified to value an investment company dealing in real estate since the company is not a piece of real estate but a business with diverse assets and finds real estate valuation is by nature “imprecise.”
Marcus v. Quattrocchi
Court says under Daubert a business valuator is qualified to value an investment company dealing in real estate since the company is not a piece of real estate but a business with diverse assets and finds real estate valuation is by nature “imprecise.”
Court Rejects Expert’s Regression Equation to Determine DLOM
In determining the fair market value of a revocable trust’s interest in an LLC, the Tax Court adopts the IRS expert’s marketability discount and valuation; he rightly assumed it was reasonably foreseeable at the time of the decedent’s death that the trust ...
Estate of Koons v. Commissioner
In determining the fair market value of a revocable trust’s interest in an LLC, the Tax Court adopts the IRS expert’s marketability discount and valuation; he rightly assumed it was reasonably foreseeable at the time of the decedent’s death that the trust ...
Tax Court displeased with all experts’ DLOC and DLOM analyses
The primary issues in this gift tax case were the appropriate discounts for lack of control and lack of marketability to apply to gifted and sold interests of a family limited partnership.
Court Uses Raw Data From Bajaj Study to Determine DLOM
The only issue in this case was the fair market value of gifted family limited partnership (FLP) interests.
Peracchio v. Commissioner
Issues were appropriate discount for lack of control and discount for lack of marketability to apply in valuing gifts of family limited partnership interests.
Lappo v. Commissioner
The issue for decision is the fair market value of interests in a family limited partnership that petitioner transferred in 1996.
Emory responds to Dr. Bajaj: miniscule adjustments warranted
In this article, John Emory and his colleagues address Dr. Bajaj's criticism of their pre-IPO discount for lack of marketability studies ( BVU , March 2002, pp. 12-14). The result is no adjustment to ...
Latest REIT statistics
2001 NAREIT Statistical Digest , NAREIT, 1875 Eye St., NW, Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20006-5413, www.nareit.com. This software tool produced by the National Association of Real Estate Inv ...
Discounts may apply when company holds nonhomogeneous assets or a diverse portfolio
Shannon Pratt's latest book Business Valuation Discounts and Premiums thoroughly discusses the well-known minority and marketability discounts. However, it also covers less familiar discounts, such as ...
Estate of Smith v. Commissioner
At issue is the value of Smith's shares of stock in two companies, Jones Farm Inc., and First National Bank of Waverly, as of her death.
Court Accepts Taxpayer's 76% Discount on Farm Corporation
The estate in this case held minority interests in two companies: Jones Farm Inc. (JFI) (33% ownership of common stock) and in the First National Bank of Waverly (FNBW) (12% of common stock).