Richard D. Hohenstein - Page 16

                                       - 16 -                                         
          on farm production.  The cash leases did not provide an equity              
          interest for Hohenstein.  The Court recognizes the plight of                
          petitioner that led to his cash lease of the remaining parcels of           
          the Nicollet farm just 2 years before the expiration of the 10-             
          year post-death period.  Hohenstein apparently relied on the                
          advice of two local lawyers that such leases would not trigger a            
          recapture tax, when a conceivable sharecropping arrangement would           
          not have resulted in a cessation of qualified use.  However,                
          neither the Code nor the regulations envisage any de minimis                
          exception to the qualified use requirement of section 2032A, and            
          we see no basis for reading such an exception into that                     
          provision.  See Martin v. Commissioner, supra at 635.                       
          III.  A Certificate of Release of Federal Estate Tax Lien Is Not            
          a Concession by Respondent, and Does Not Preclude a Subsequent              
          Assessment of Additional Estate Tax                                         
               Petitioner's argument that respondent's issuance of a                  
          Certificate of Release From Estate Tax Lien represents her                  
          acquiescence in the cash lease arrangements in question is                  
          unpersuasive.  The release was not a concession by the respondent           
          that the leases would not effect a recapture tax.  Rather, the              
          release was issued only after the receipt of an amended Form 706-           
          A and a check from petitioner for $64,159 plus interest that                
          purported to satisfy the additional estate tax owed.  Moreover,             
          although this amount appears to have been undercalculated as a              
          result of the insertion of an incorrect fair market value on line           
          6 of the amended Form 706-A, respondent is not precluded from               




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011