Gerald D. and Catherine Leibowitz - Page 34

                                       - 34 -                                         
               Warren considered the collection as a whole to have little             
          intrinsic value because it consisted of “minor or unknown films             
          released by United Artists”.  He evaluated the collection as                
          little more than a hoard, virtually unsalable within a short                
          period of time, even at distress sale prices in the convention              
          market.  Warren also discounted the overall value of the                    
          collection because it consisted mostly of stills, pressbooks, and           
          lobby cards, which he considered to be of the lowest value to a             
          collector.  Based upon these foregoing considerations, Warren               
          assigned values as low as 25 cents to individual items.  Warren’s           
          base value for a one-sheet was $1.  His highest single assigned             
          value for a one-sheet was $75 for “Thunder Road”.  Warren                   
          appraised the collection at the time of its donation to AMMI in             
          1985 at $5,733.49.                                                          
          3.  The Relevant Market                                                     
               Selection of the proper market for valuation purposes is a             
          question of fact.  Anselmo v. Commissioner, 757 F.2d at 1213.  In           
          determining the appropriate market to use in valuing most types             
          of property, a sale “to the public” normally refers to a sale to            
          the retail customer who is the ultimate consumer.  Lio v.                   
          Commissioner, 85 T.C. at 70; Anselmo v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. at            
          882.  A sale to an ultimate consumer is any sale to those persons           
          who do not hold the item for subsequent resale.  Goldman v.                 
          Commissioner, 388 F.2d 476, 478 (6th Cir. 1967), affg. 46 T.C.              
          136 (1966).  However, when used in this context, the term                   




Page:  Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011