S.K. Johnston, III and Julie N. Boyle f.k.a. Julie N. Johnston, et al. - Page 41

                                               - 41 -                                                 

            conservation easement.  Boyett has valued farmland and ranches                            
            for individual farmers and for companies.  His experience is                              
            primarily confined to the southeast.                                                      
                  Discussion                                                                          
                  On their 1989 return, the Johnstons claimed a $960,000                              
            charitable contribution deduction for the easement granted to the                         
            Conservancy.  The amount of the deduction was based upon an                               
            appraisal which valued the property before the easement at                                
            $2,035,00013 and after the easement at $1,075,000; the $960,000                           
            difference between the before and after value represents the                              
            value of the easement.  Respondent determined that the easement                           
            reduced petitioners' property value by $203,500,14 not $960,000                           
            as claimed on their 1989 return.  Accordingly, respondent reduced                         
            petitioners' deduction for the value of the easement by $756,500;                         
            the difference between the $960,000 claimed on their original                             
            1989 return and the $203,500 allowed by respondent pursuant to                            
            the notice of deficiency.                                                                 



            13    On brief, respondent concedes that $2,057,160 was the                               
            property's value before the easement.  This amount is $22,160                             
            greater than petitioners' original valuation of $2,035,000.                               
            14    In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined that the                         
            easement reduced petitioners' property value by $203,500.  On                             
            brief, however, respondent contends that the easement reduced                             
            petitioners' property value by $407,000, which is double the                              
            amount originally allowed by respondent in the notice of                                  
            deficiency.  Although, the record is silent as to why respondent                          
            made this adjustment, we find this to be a concession in                                  
            petitioners' favor.                                                                       



Page:  Previous  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011