Tennebaum v. Deshpande
In this Minnesota appeal of a marital dissolution decree, the district court received valuations from experts representing both parties and determined the value of the husband’s business interest in an asset management company. The husband appealed that value. The district court had considered matters of methodology as well as personal goodwill. The court of appeals found that the district court did not abuse its discretion and affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Valuation of Husband’s Business Interest Considers Credibility, Personal Goodwill, and Other Issues
In this Minnesota appeal of a marital dissolution decree, the district court received valuations from experts representing both parties and determined the value of the husband’s business interest in an asset management company. The husband appealed that value. The district court had considered matters of methodology as well as personal goodwill. The court of appeals found that the district court did not abuse its discretion and affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Chancery Court Determines Value of Shares by Applying Average of GPCM and DCF Methodologies
In a long and complex opinion, the Delaware Court of Chancery determined the value per share of stock in a former stockholder’s appraisal action. The per-share value was reached by ascribing equal weight to adjusted versions of the comparable companies analysis (GPCM) the stockholder advanced and the discounted cash flow analysis the company advanced. The other methodologies were rejected. The use of the GPCM represented the first use of that method in some years.
HBK Master Fund L.P. v. Pivotal Software, Inc.
In a long and complex opinion, the Delaware Court of Chancery determined the value per share of stock in a former stockholder’s appraisal action. The per-share value was reached by ascribing equal weight to adjusted versions of the comparable companies analysis (GPCM) the stockholder advanced and the discounted cash flow analysis the company advanced. The other methodologies were rejected. The use of the GPCM represented the first use of that method in some years.
Young practitioners question traditional discount methodologies
“Outdated studies” and “emerging quantitative methods” are some reasons why young valuation practitioners are questioning the traditional methodologies for estimating discounts for lack of control and marketability (DLOC and DLOM).
Bankruptcy Court Determines Fair Value Under Asset Approach With ‘Limited Evidence’ Available to It
This case involved a hotly contested battle over the fate of a Ponderosa restaurant in Michigan. The two owners, having had a falling out, pursued contentious litigation to wrest control of the restaurant from each other. Having no business valuation available to the court, the court was left with a real estate appraisal and limited evidence of assets and liabilities to determine the fair value of a 50% interest in the restaurant to be used in the buyout of one of the shareholders by the other shareholder.
Herremans v. Fedo (In re Herremans)
This case involved a hotly contested battle over the fate of a Ponderosa restaurant in Michigan. The two owners, having had a falling out, pursued contentious litigation to wrest control of the restaurant from each other. Having no business valuation available to the court, the court was left with a real estate appraisal and limited evidence of assets and liabilities to determine the fair value of a 50% interest in the restaurant to be used in the buyout of one of the shareholders by the other shareholder.
BV News and Trends June 2023
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
Tide has turned (somewhat) for ESOP valuations
From a regulatory standpoint, the tide has turned to some degree with respect to ESOP valuations, speakers said at the ASA’s ESOP Virtual Conference on June 20.
Bennetti v. Oxford Restructuring Advisors LLC (In re Community Providers of Enrichment Services AZ Liquidating, Inc.)
Employee members of an ESOP had their claims against the debtors, based on cash option rights in an ESOP, denied. The debtors were not obligated to employees under the ESOP. The ESOP needed only to provide distributions in cash. There was no right of payment from the debtors. The U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the 9th Circuit affirmed.
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Denies Employee Members of ESOP Claims Against Debtors
Employee members of an ESOP had their claims against the debtors, based on cash option rights in an ESOP, denied. The debtors were not obligated to employees under the ESOP. The ESOP needed only to provide distributions in cash. There was no right of payment from the debtors. The U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the 9th Circuit affirmed.
Connelly v. United States
The importance of this case was that the 8th Circuit’s decision to affirm the lower court and IRS’ inclusion of life insurance proceeds in the value of the corporation for which decedent’s stock was redeemed. This contradicted the decision of the 11th Circuit in Estate of Blount that 26 C.F.R. § 20.2031-2(f)(2) precluded the inclusion of life-insurance proceeds in the corporate value when the proceeds were used for a redemption obligation.
8th Circuit Affirms District Court—Includes Life Insurance Proceeds in Value of Redeemed Shares
The importance of this case was that the 8th Circuit’s decision to affirm the lower court and IRS’ inclusion of life insurance proceeds in the value of the corporation for which decedent’s stock was redeemed. This contradicted the decision of the 11th Circuit in Estate of Blount that 26 C.F.R. § 20.2031-2(f)(2) precluded the inclusion of life-insurance proceeds in the corporate value when the proceeds were used for a redemption obligation.
BV News and Trends May 2023
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
BVWire continues on the BV conference circuit
June is busting out with two events that BVWire is looking forward to attending.
Attorney gets Daubert challenge over ESOP employment agreements
In a federal court in Georgia, an employee benefits lawyer prepared a report and was deposed regarding the process by which employment agreements were negotiated as part of a transaction involving an ESOP.
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.
DOL—finally—agrees to provide regs on ESOP valuations
At long last, the door has been opened for the Department of Labor (DOL) and the valuation profession to work together to develop guidance on ESOP valuations.
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.
Gamache v. Hogue
In a motion related to a lawsuit asserting ERISA violations under the ESOP plan for the defendants, including the Administrative Committee of Technical Associates of Georgia Inc. ESOP and certain individuals, the defendants moved to exclude the testimony and report of the plaintiffs’ expert, Jeffrey Krenzel. Krenzel was an “employee benefits lawyer” with 21 years’ experience, including eight years as a partner in a firm specializing in ESOP transactions. The court determined that Krenzel was qualified and that his opinions and report were reliable and helpful to the trier of fact.
U.S. District Court in Georgia Allows Testimony of Attorney as to ESOP Transaction Process for Employment Agreements
In a motion related to a lawsuit asserting ERISA violations under the ESOP plan for the defendants, including the Administrative Committee of Technical Associates of Georgia Inc. ESOP and certain individuals, the defendants moved to exclude the testimony and report of the plaintiffs’ expert, Jeffrey Krenzel. Krenzel was an “employee benefits lawyer” with 21 years’ experience, including eight years as a partner in a firm specializing in ESOP transactions. The court determined that Krenzel was qualified and that his opinions and report were reliable and helpful to the trier of fact.
Stout updates its restricted stock study companion guide
The 2022 edition of the “Stout Restricted Stock Study Companion Guide” is now available, and it reflects updated tables and graphs that contain new transactions.
Hoensheid v. Comm’r (In re Estate of Hoensheid)
The taxpayers made a valid gift of stock, but they realized and recognized gain because their right to the proceeds from the sale occurred before the gift was made. They also were not entitled to a charitable contribution deduction because they did not procure a qualified appraisal. The taxpayers were not liable for an underpayment penalty.
Petitioners Not Allowed a Charitable Contribution—Did Not Use a Qualified Appraiser
The taxpayers made a valid gift of stock, but they realized and recognized gain because their right to the proceeds from the sale occurred before the gift was made. They also were not entitled to a charitable contribution deduction because they did not procure a qualified appraisal. The taxpayers were not liable for an underpayment penalty.
Users inspire update to the Stout DLOM calculator
Estimating a discount for lack of marketability (DLOM) has just become more robust with a new update to the Stout DLOM calculator.