- 13 - supra at 377. Generally, we are willing to find that a threat of condemnation has taken place if the taxpayer might reasonably believe from representations of Government agents and from surrounding circumstances that condemnation was likely to take place if the taxpayer did not sell the property. Id. at 376. We have been unwilling to find a threat, however, where it should have appeared to the taxpayer that the chance of condemnation was remote. Rainier Cos. v. Commissioner, 61 T.C. 68, 76 (1973), revd. and remanded in part on another issue without unpublished order 538 F.2d 338 (9th Cir. 1975); Warner v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 1126, 1137 (1971), affd. without published opinion 478 F.2d 1406 (7th Cir. 1973). Whether property is converted under a threat of condemnation is a question of fact, and petitioners bear the burden of proof. Rule 142(a). 1. Eminent Domain The body threatening condemnation must possess the power of eminent domain. Under section 1033, as long as an agency could readily obtain authority to condemn in the event that the taxpayer refused to cooperate, actual authority to condemn is not required at the time the threat was made. See Balistrieri v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1979-115. Cities in California have the power of eminent domain. Cal. Govt. Code sec. 37350.5 (West 1988); City of Needles v. Griswold, 8 Cal. Rptr. 2d 753 (Ct. App. 1992). Lancaster's ability toPage: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011