- 25 -
which the property would change hands between a willing seller
and a willing buyer who both have a reasonable knowledge of the
facts and are not under any compulsion to sell or buy. United
States v. Cartwright, 411 U.S. 546, 550-551 (1973); sec. 1.170A-
1(c)(2), Income Tax Regs. Respondent's determination of the fair
market value is presumed to be correct, and petitioners have the
burden of proving otherwise. Rule 142(a). However, fair market
value is a question of fact, Lio v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 56, 66,
68 (1985), affd. sub nom. Orth v. Commissioner, 813 F.2d 837 (7th
Cir. 1987), that this Court must answer as a matter of judgment,
Hamm v. Commissioner, 325 F.2d 934, 940 (8th Cir. 1963), affg.
T.C. Memo. 1961-347, on the basis of all the evidence in the
record, Helvering v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 316 U.S. 56, 66-67
(1942); Silverman v. Commissioner, 538 F.2d 927, 933 (2d Cir.
1976), affg. T.C. Memo. 1974-285.
Although the regulations under section 170 provide no
guidance on whether to value property in bulk or on an individual
basis, or on the market to be used to value property and how to
select that market, the guidance found in the Estate Tax
Regulations is applicable to charitable contributions for income
tax purposes. Champion v. Commissioner, 303 F.2d 887, 892-893
(5th Cir. 1962) (“There is no distinction, for most purposes
* * * in the meaning of fair market value as used in an estate
tax case and one involving income tax.”), revg. and remanding on
other grounds T.C. Memo. 1960-51; Anselmo v. Commissioner, 80
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011