Estate of Frank A. Branson - Page 39




                                       - 39 -                                         

          in the 1980 merger with Holiday Inns.  At this time, the                    
          Commissioner and the estate stipulated that for estate tax                  
          purposes the Harrah's stock had a value of $19.41 per share.                
          Because of this stipulation, the value of the Harrah's stock was            
          not an issue on appeal.  See Estate of Harrah v. United States,             
          supra at 1125 n.4.                                                          
               After the stipulation of the value of the Harrah's stock,              
          the estate filed a revised claim for refund of its 1980 income              
          taxes.  In 1988, the Government stated that it would oppose the             
          1980 refund claim on the grounds that the convertible                       
          subordinated debentures were undervalued.  In 1989, the estate              
          filed suit in District Court for refund of $10,542,641 of income            
          tax paid for the 1980 taxable year.                                         
               At this time, the estate filed a claim for refund of income            
          taxes for the 1983 and 1984 taxable years, and the marital trust            
          filed a claim with respect to its 1984 taxable year.  The claims            
          filed for 1983 and 1984 were denied on the grounds that they were           
          untimely.  As a result of the denial of these claims, the estate            
          amended its refund suit in District Court to include its claims             
          for the 1983 and 1984 years.  The marital trust joined in this              
          action, and sought a refund for its 1984 taxable year.                      
               The District Court applied the doctrine of equitable                   
          recoupment and found the three refund claims were not barred by             
          the statute of limitations and also found that the proper                   





Page:  Previous  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011