- 88 - Crocker contends that the best method to value both the theater component and the retail/office component of the property is the replacement cost method because there are no true comparable sales: There are no comparable sales of a historic movie palace such as the Fox Theater with its appendage, the Retail/Office Space. There are comparable sales of the parts, but not the whole, and in our case, for appraisal value purposes, the whole is bigger than the sum of its parts. Because each appraiser determined that the property should be preserved, and "the whole is inseparable", Crocker argues the property must be valued by use of the replacement cost method. Respondent's position is that comparable properties--the San Jose Fox and the Stanford Theater--were sold during the relevant time period, and, therefore, these transactions should be given primary emphasis in the determination of fair market value. Respondent disputes the reliability of the replacement cost method in this instance for a number reasons, and further argues that the comparable sales transactions demonstrate that the fair market value of the Redwood City Fox is "not equal to * * * [its] replacement cost, but rather, it is far less." This Court has held that replacement cost may be considered in valuing property. Cupler v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 946, 955 (1975). However, replacement cost is an appropriate measure of value only where the taxpayer establishes a probative correlation between such cost and the fair market value of the property.Page: Previous 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011