- 31 -
do not consider a limited partner's right to vote on such matters
to be significant for purposes of deciding the question presented.
We further note that petitioners retained the right to vote
the limited partnership interests and petitioners and the Kerr
children had the ability to convert the purported assignee
interests to full limited partnership interests or liquidate the
partnership at will. To characterize the interests that
petitioners transferred to the GRAT’s trustees as assignee
interests ignores the objective economic reality that there was no
meaningful difference between the transfer of an assignee interest
as opposed to a limited partnership interest.
D. Tax Motivation
The record shows that Eastland structured petitioners'
transfers to the GRAT’s trustees primarily to avoid the special
valuation rules set forth in section 2704(b). Eastland's writings
on the subject of family limited partnerships disclose his belief
that the transfer of an assignee interest from one family member to
another would serve to circumvent section 2704(b). Accepting
petitioner's testimony that he did not consider whether he was
transferring a limited partnership interest as opposed to an
assignee interest to his GRAT’s, it appears that Eastland made a
conscious decision not to raise the subject with his clients.
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011