- 7 -
294 (1938); Estate of Watts v. Commissioner, supra at 485. We do
not believe that we would be properly discharging our duty if we
were to set forth at this point one (and only one) method of
valuation that must be used to determine the fair market value of
Decedent's partnership interest. See Estate of Andrews v.
Commissioner, 79 T.C. 938, 944-945 (1982). Cases of valuation
require us to determine the price that a hypothetical willing
buyer would pay a hypothetical willing seller, both persons
having reasonable knowledge of all relevant facts and neither
person being under any compulsion to buy or to sell. Sec.
20.2031-1(b), Estate Tax Regs.; see also United States v.
Cartwright, 411 U.S. 546, 551 (1973); Estate of Watts v.
Commissioner, supra at 486; Estate of Bright v. United States,
658 F.2d 999, 1005-1006 (5th Cir. 1981); Estate of Newhouse v.
Commissioner, 94 T.C. 193, 218 (1990). It would be inappropriate
for us at this juncture to limit our consideration to one method
in order to determine this price.
Petitioner relies incorrectly on the Court of Appeals for
the Eleventh Circuit's opinion in Estate of Watts v.
Commissioner, supra, to support its position that Decedent's
partnership interest must be valued under a going concern
methodology. We do not read that opinion to compel such a
holding as a matter of law. Although we agree with petitioner
that the facts of Estate of Watts are somewhat similar in certain
respects to the instant case, we find significant differences
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011