- 18 -
more restrictive than the restrictions imposed on assignees under
TRLPA. See sec. 2704(b)(3)(B).
Respondent filed an objection to petitioners' motion for
partial summary judgment asserting in part that petitioners had not
properly raised the assignment issue in their petition.
Petitioners filed a response to respondent's objection and a
motion for leave to file an amendment to petition and lodged an
amendment to petition with the Court raising the assignee issue.
The Court granted petitioners' motion for leave and filed
petitioners' amendment to petition.
Respondent subsequently filed an amended answer to the
amendment to petition. Respondent also filed a supplemental
objection to petitioners' motion asserting that facts remained in
dispute regarding petitioners' intent in making the disputed
transfers.
Initially, this matter was called for hearing in Washington,
D.C. During the hearing, counsel for petitioners conceded that,
because the Kerr children were already limited partners of KILP
when petitioners transferred additional KILP interests to them in
1994 and 1995, the Kerr children received limited partnership
interests, as opposed to assignee interests. However, petitioners
argued that these property interests should be valued for Federal
gift tax purposes as assignee interests under the willing
buyer/willing seller standard set forth in section 25.2512-1, Gift
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011