Appraisers see spike in engagements due to proposed Section 2704 regs
At the ASA Advanced Business Valuation Conference last week in Boca Raton, Fla., valuation practitioners told us that they are seeing an increase in valuation engagements triggered by the proposed Section 2704 regulations. They expect the increased business to gain steam as the regs continue to sink in with attorneys, wealth planners, and clients.
Compromised Asset Appraisals Undo Like-Kind Tax Plan
Tax Court says taxpayer’s transactions fail to meet Section 1031 requirements for income tax deferral; legal advisor’s ongoing interference with appraisal process compromised asset appraisals undergirding transactions to the point they became “useless.”
Exelon Corp. v. Commissioner
Tax Court says taxpayer’s transactions fail to meet Section 1031 requirements for income tax deferral; legal advisor’s ongoing interference with appraisal process compromised asset appraisals undergirding transactions to the point they became “useless.”
Challenge to new Section 2704 regulations is shaping up
The accounting, valuation, and legal professions are hard at work to defeat the Treasury Department's proposed Section 274 regulations. The new regs would curtail, if not entirely eliminate, valuation discounts in family-controlled entities.
Chancery achieves fair value with three imperfect valuation techniques
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Perhaps Chancellor Bouchard thought of Aristotle when he recently ruled in a statutory appraisal action that, even though the results of three common valuation techniques were unreliable indicators of value, in combination they established fair value.
Tax Court revaluation means big-time savings for taxpayer
In an estate tax dispute that has lasted for over five years, the Tax Court recently revalued the decedent’s minority interest in an Oregon family business by order of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The recalculation proved a boon to the taxpayer.
Dreaded IRS estate valuation discount regs released
The Treasury has released long-awaited proposed IRC Section 2704 regulations designed to curb estate valuation discounts. It appears that the proposed regulations eliminate almost all minority discounts for closely held entity interests, including operating businesses owned by a family. The proposed regs have triggered a strong response from the valuation community, legal profession, and others.
S Corp model now in Tax Court
At the recent NYSSCPA business valuation conference in New York City, Daniel Van Vleet (Stout Risius Ross) told the audience that the Van Vleet model (S corporation economic adjustment model) is being used for the first time in a pending U.S. Tax Court case. What’s more, both the IRS and the taxpayer are using it in this case, says Van Vleet.
NACVA's star-studded silver anniversary conference
Shannon Pratt, Roger Grabowski, Jim Hitchner, Nancy Fannon, and the Honorable Judge David Laro of the Tax Court are just a few of valuation thought leaders dubbed by NACVA as “industry titans” who gave presentations at the organization’s 25th anniversary conference in San Diego
Tax Court Corrects Prior Valuation of LP Interest to Startling Result
On remand Tax Court recalculates decedent’s minority LP interest in family partnership by relying entirely on DCF value and giving no weight to value of company’s timberland assets; newly calculated value is half the original value.
Estate of Giustina v. Commissioner (Giustina III)
On remand Tax Court recalculates decedent’s minority LP interest in family partnership by relying entirely on DCF value and giving no weight to value of company’s timberland assets; newly calculated value is half the original value.
Cdx Holdings, Inc. v. Fox (Fox II)
In medical company valuation case, high court affirms award to option holders based on deference owed to trial court’s findings of historical fact; dissent says Chancery’s dismissal of board members’ valuation testimony evinces Chancery’s hindsight bias.
High Court Dissent Rebukes Chancery’s Analysis in Option Valuation Case
In medical company valuation case, high court affirms award to option holders based on deference owed to trial court’s findings of historical fact; dissent says Chancery’s dismissal ...
Highest Court Rebukes Trial Court Over Flat-Out Bar of DCF Approach
State high court says trial court’s categorical rejection of DCF method to value a special purpose plant for tax assessment purposes is improper where parties’ “experienced and knowledgeable” experts relied on it; court remands for new trial on valuation.
No Place for DLOM and Tax Affecting in New York Fair Value Determination
In statutory fair value proceeding to enable buyout of minority interest in limited liability companies, New York court says prevailing expert opinion understates future income stream; court upward adjusts by eliminating DLOM and disallowing tax affecting ...
Key Tax Ruling From Ohio Supreme Court Concerning Pass-Through Entity
Ohio Supreme Court says tax provision imposing state income tax on capital gain realized by nonresident investor in pass-through entity violates taxpayer’s due process rights barring showing taxpayer’s activities are “unitary with” those of the business.
Corrigan v. Testa
Ohio Supreme Court says tax provision imposing state income tax on capital gain realized by nonresident investor in pass-through entity violates taxpayer’s due process rights barring showing taxpayer’s activities are “unitary with” those of the business.
Subsequent Transaction Too Remote to Allow for Reliable Valuation
In gift tax dispute involving decades-old transaction by a media magnate, Tax Court upholds IRS’s deficiency ruling and credits agency expert’s valuation of transferred stock based on a similar arm’s-length transaction occurring near the valuation date.
Ohio Appeals Court Clarifies Provision on Tax Affecting at Divorce
Appeals court says consideration of tax consequences related to owner-spouse’s business is “too speculative” because owner has no plan to sell in near future; trial court improperly assumed current tax rates and business interests would remain constant.
NY fair value ruling deals blow to DLOM
The case featured experts whose professional backgrounds and valuation approaches could hardly be more dissimilar. Their value determinations were light-years apart. In trying to make sense of the conflicting testimony and achieve a plausible and fair result, the court decided it could not totally trust either valuation. Although it adopted the defense expert's valuation, it made two consequential changes to it. One was getting rid of the expert's admittedly high and insufficiently explained 35% discount for lack of marketability.
Verghetta v. Lawlor
In statutory fair value proceeding to enable buyout of minority interest in limited liability companies, New York court says prevailing expert opinion understates future income stream; court upward adjusts by eliminating DLOM and disallowing tax affecting ...
Wheelabrator Bridgeport, L.P. v. City of Bridgeport
State high court says trial court’s categorical rejection of DCF method to value a special purpose plant for tax assessment purposes is improper where parties’ “experienced and knowledgeable” experts relied on it; court remands for new trial on valuation.
Practice tips for valuation experts from tax court insiders
Judge Laro reminded experts to guard against domineering attorneys who insist on reviewing draft opinions and seek to nudge an expert into achieving a predetermined result. Valuation experts need to know the discovery rules (Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) rather than assume that all of the attorney-expert communication is protected.
Shaky Industrial Plant Valuation Survives High Court Review
Tax court adopts taxpayer expert’s value of the loss determination underlying real market valuation of industrial plant; state’s high court affirms but notes unresolved contradiction in financial feasibility analysis underpinning expert’s final valuation.
Nieman v. Nieman
Appeals court says consideration of tax consequences related to owner-spouse’s business is “too speculative” because owner has no plan to sell in near future; trial court improperly assumed current tax rates and business interests would remain constant.