- 37 -
that a liquidation was planned or that it could not have been
accomplished without incurring a capital gains tax at the
corporate level. Ward v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 78, 103-104
(1986); Estate of Andrews v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 938 (1982);
Estate of Piper v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. 1062 (1979); Estate of
Cruikshank v. Commissioner, 9 T.C. 162 (1947). Our denial in the
past of a built-in capital gains discount was based in part on
the notion that valuation discounts for estate and gift tax
purposes are not appropriate where based on an event that may not
transpire. See, e.g., Ward v. Commissioner, supra at 103-104
(selling costs and taxes recognized not taken into account when
liquidation only speculative); Estate of Piper v. Commissioner,
supra at 1087 (no discount for built-in capital gains where no
evidence liquidation was planned, or could not have been
accomplished without corporate level recognition of capital
gains); Estate of Cruikshank v. Commissioner, supra at 165 (tax
on appreciation only hypothetical where no demonstrated intent to
liquidate, and liquidation could occur without corporate level
tax).
Prior to the repeal of the doctrine established in General
Utils. & Operating Co. v. Helvering, 296 U.S. 200 (1935) (the
General Utilities doctrine), the recognition of corporate level
capital gains taxes could also be speculative because the General
Utilities doctrine, as codified in former sections 336 and 337,
allowed the tax-free liquidation of a corporation and thus the
complete avoidance of corporate level capital gains. Thus, even
Page: Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011