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.
Another big win for ESOP valuations vs. the DOL
Valuation experts have long maintained that the Department of Labor (DOL) has been playing by its own valuation rules in its aggressive enforcement of ESOPs—rules that are not consistent with accepted valuation standards. But a court has rejected the valuations the DOL did in a case alleging that an ESOP overvalued (and thus overpaid for) the stock of its sponsoring company.
Walsh v. Preston
In this ESOP ERISA case, the government (plaintiffs) (Secretary of Labor) alleged claims against the defendants, Robert N. Preston and TPP Holdings Inc. (and nominally against its ESOP) for: (1) breach of fiduciary duties; (2) engaging in prohibited transactions; and (3) co-liability of defendants. In a lengthy opinion, the court determined that the defendants did breach fiduciary duties and did engage in prohibited transactions. It further decided that there was no co-liability among the defendants, but it did not allow an offset of payments on debt of TPP Preston personally made. In determining FMV, the court did not allow a minority interest discount. In so doing, the resulting damages determined were minimal.
U.S. District Court Decides Some Issues for Government and Some for Defendants But Very Little in Damages in an ERISA ESOP Case
In this ESOP ERISA case, the government (plaintiffs) (Secretary of Labor) alleged claims against the defendants, Robert N. Preston and TPP Holdings Inc. (and nominally against its ESOP) for: (1) breach of fiduciary duties; (2) engaging in prohibited transactions; and (3) co-liability of defendants. In a lengthy opinion, the court determined that the defendants did breach fiduciary duties and did engage in prohibited transactions. It further decided that there was no co-liability among the defendants, but it did not allow an offset of payments on debt of TPP Preston personally made. In determining FMV, the court did not allow a minority interest discount. In so doing, the resulting damages determined were minimal.
The New Stark FMV is a Game Changer: The Rejection of “Survey Says” for Stark-Compliant Physician Compensation
This two-part BVR webinar series provides a critical and in-depth assessment of the new definitions of fair market value under the regulations for the federal physician self-referral law commonly known as “Stark.” Many in the healthcare valuation industry have viewed the updated definitions, along with new commentary from the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), as promoting “business as usual” for healthcare valuation practice. Timothy Smith, however, begs to differ. Smith was a major ...
Warranting Further Discussion: Why the Use of Financing Warrants in ESOP Transactions Benefits American Workers
The leveraged Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) structure was created by US Congress to enable American workers to gain an equity interest in their companies without using their own funds. A critical component in the financing of leveraged ESOP transactions is a “warrant,” which enables corporate sponsors of ESOPs to access the financing necessary to facilitate purchases of company stock by ESOPs. Warrants also afford substantial benefits to ESOPs by providing downside risk for ESOP ...
Simons v. Simons
The Nebraska Supreme Court allowed a fair value determination by the wife’s expert as the appropriate value for a divorce case and did not include any discounts that might apply in a fair market value determination. Much of the opinion dealt with the issue of a constructive trust, which the trial court determined results in a 50% ownership by the wife in the family business.
Nebraska Supreme Court Allows Fair Value Determination for Family-Owned Business and Does Not Allow Discounts
The Nebraska Supreme Court allowed a fair value determination by the wife’s expert as the appropriate value for a divorce case and did not include any discounts that might apply in a fair market value determination. Much of the opinion dealt with the issue of a constructive trust, which the trial court determined results in a 50% ownership by the wife in the family business.
Important Provider Compensation Topics in 2022
To begin a dialogue on important topics in physician compensation and fair market value, PYA surveyed more than 30 physician compensation experts to understand the collective thoughts on issues impacting these topics in 2022. These issues range from compensation for advance practice practitioners to value-based compensation. Please join PYA Senior Manager Katie Taylor as she discusses key physician compensation issues in 2022 ...
Healthcare whistleblower case regarding FMV can proceed
The CFO of a healthcare provider blew the whistle on his former employer, alleging it overpaid for a surgery center in order to induce it to refer future business.
The New Stark FMV is a Game-Changer: Foundational Concepts and Valuation Methodology
This two-part BVR webinar series provides a critical and in-depth assessment of the new definitions of fair market value under the regulations for the federal physician self-referral law commonly known as “Stark.” Many in the healthcare valuation industry have viewed the updated definitions, along with new commentary from the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), as promoting “business as usual” for healthcare valuation practice. Timothy Smith, however, begs to differ. Smith was a major ...
BV News and Trends June 2022
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
ESOP valuations may be at a turning point
At last week’s inaugural ESOP Virtual Conference hosted by the American Society of Appraisers, the landmark Bowers case was discussed, which could represent a turning point for ESOP valuations.
Kuzma v. N. Ariz. Healthcare Corp.
The defendants in this qui tam case asked for summary judgment against the plaintiff Relator, who had alleged violations of the False Claims Act as it related to the sale of Surgery and Rehabilitation Centers by the defendants. Relator brought suit against the defendants, alleging they violated the FCA by overpaying the physician-owners of the Summit Center to reward them for past business and to induce future business in violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. The defendants advanced three arguments in favor of summary judgment: (1) the acquisition price paid for the Summit Center was fair market value; (2) Relator had no evidence that the defendants acted with the requisite scienter; and (3) Relator cannot show a causal link between the alleged kickback and the submission of false claims.
U.S. District Court Partially Denies Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding Qui Tam Case on Excess Purchase Price Under the False Claims Act
The defendants in this qui tam case asked for summary judgment against the plaintiff Relator, who had alleged violations of the False Claims Act as it related to the sale of Surgery and Rehabilitation Centers by the defendants. Relator brought suit against the defendants, alleging they violated the FCA by overpaying the physician-owners of the Summit Center to reward them for past business and to induce future business in violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. The defendants advanced three arguments in favor of summary judgment: (1) the acquisition price paid for the Summit Center was fair market value; (2) Relator had no evidence that the defendants acted with the requisite scienter; and (3) Relator cannot show a causal link between the alleged kickback and the submission of false claims.
In Re S-Tek 1, LLC
The debtor, S-Tek 1 LLC, submitted a motion to value to the Bankruptcy Court to determine the value of the collateral of Surv-Tek Inc. as to debt owed it by the debtor pledged as collateral for debt owed by S-Tek to Surv-Tek. The valuation was to be used in the confirmation of a Chapter 11 reorganization of S-Tek. The court used the replacement value standard of value instead of the “ongoing concern” value since the replacement value provided a value greater than the “enterprise value” (i.e., ongoing concern value).
Bankruptcy Court Uses the ‘Replacement Value Standard’ as It Determines That Debtor ‘Enterprise Value’ Is Lower and Inappropriate
The debtor, S-Tek 1 LLC, submitted a motion to value to the Bankruptcy Court to determine the value of the collateral of Surv-Tek Inc. as to debt owed it by the debtor pledged as collateral for debt owed by S-Tek to Surv-Tek. The valuation was to be used in the confirmation of a Chapter 11 reorganization of S-Tek. The court used the replacement value standard of value instead of the “ongoing concern” value since the replacement value provided a value greater than the “enterprise value” (i.e., ongoing concern value).
BV News and Trends April 2022
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
Purchase price equals value of business caught up in divorce
In Wisconsin, the valuation opinions of two experts were deemed not credible for a business caught up in a marital dissolution.
No valuation adjustment for alleged acts of oppression
In a Connecticut case, four siblings were partners in a number of restaurant properties and one of the partners (who had a 25% interest) was ousted by the others.
AICPA offers free webcast on estate/gift valuations
A two-and-a half-hour webcast on estate and gift valuations is available free of charge from the AICPA.
Two cases on trapped-in gains tax—with opposite outcomes
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.
Dettloff-Meyer v. Meyer
The husband in this divorce case appealed the circuit court ruling that relied on the purchase price of the business less than a year before the valuation date. The purchase was made from the wife’s parents at a price the parents determined of $500,000, most of which was goodwill. After an initial ruling from the circuit court accepting the value less debt of the husband’s expert, the wife asked for a reconsideration. The Circuit Court granted the reconsideration and found a value of the business of $45,230. The husband appealed the reconsidered decision of the circuit court. The appellate court determined that the circuit court’s use of the purchase price was not erroneous.
Wisconsin Appellate Court Affirms Purchase Price as Value of the Business in a Divorce Matter
The husband in this divorce case appealed the circuit court ruling that relied on the purchase price of the business less than a year before the valuation date. The purchase was made from the wife’s parents at a price the parents determined of $500,000, most of which was goodwill. After an initial ruling from the circuit court accepting the value less debt of the husband’s expert, the wife asked for a reconsideration. The Circuit Court granted the reconsideration and found a value of the business of $45,230. The husband appealed the reconsidered decision of the circuit court. The appellate court determined that the circuit court’s use of the purchase price was not erroneous.
New Case Points Up Opportunity for Buy-Sell Valuations
A recent court case illustrates that many buy-sell agreements do not adequately address the issue of valuation when an owner exits the firm. This represents an opportunity for valuation experts to review clients’ buy-sell agreements to identify potential problems, which could mean recurring business for the practice.