Jean A. Stanko - Page 28

                                         28                                           
          D.   The Value of the Packerland Note                                       
               Respondent must prove the value of the assets transferred.8            
          Tilton v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 590, 600 (1987); Ashton v.                  
          Commissioner, 28 B.T.A. 582, 584-585 (1933).  The face value of             
          the Packerland note was $3 million.  Respondent's expert, Kerry             
          Packard, estimated that the fair market value of the Packerland             
          note, using the willing buyer/willing seller test, was $2,806,979           
          on September 19, 1984, the date Stanko transferred it to                    
          petitioner.9  In making this estimate, he considered the risk of            
          nonpayment, the fact that the note was secured by real estate and           
          equipment Packerland bought from Stanko Packing, and the fact               
          that Packerland could easily pay its short-term obligations and             
          had good creditworthiness on September 19, 1984.                            
               Petitioner offered no expert testimony concerning the value            
          of the Packerland note.                                                     
               Petitioner points out that, on September 15, 1985 (the due             
          date for Stanko Packing's return for its tax year ending on June            
          21, 1985), she had received only $501,240 ($345,000 on July 15,             

               8 The parties dispute whether, and to what extent,                     
          petitioner is liable for interest if Stanko Packing's tax,                  
          additions to tax, and interest exceed the value of the Packerland           
          note.  We need not decide this issue unless the Rule 155                    
          computations show that the deficiency, additions to tax, and                
          interest exceed the value of the Packerland note.                           
               9 Although the District Court found that Stanko transferred            
          the Packerland note to petitioner on Sept. 17, 1984, the record             
          shows that Stanko actually transferred the note to petitioner on            
          Sept. 19, 1984.  The difference is in any event immaterial.                 





Page:  Previous  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011