- 2 - 3. On its Form 706, U.S. Estate (and Generation- Skipping Transfer) Tax Return, P valued D’s real estate at $2,261,800. R determined that the fair market value was $2,785,248. Held: The fair market value was $2,417,491. 4. P elected special use valuation of certain farm real property on its Form 706. R disallowed the election because P failed to document comparable rental property in accordance with sec. 2032A(e)(7), I.R.C., and the regulations thereunder. See sec. 20.2032A-4, Estate Tax Regs. Held: P may not value its elected properties under the valuation formula of sec. 2032A(e)(7), I.R.C. Held, further, by reason of sec. 20.2032A-4, Estate Tax Regs. (which provides that if an executor does not identify comparable property and cash rentals as required by sec. 2032A(e)(7), I.R.C., all specially valued real property must be valued under the rules of sec. 2032A(e)(8), I.R.C.), P may value the properties under the provisions of sec. 2032A(e)(8), I.R.C. Held, further, P’s special use valuation under sec. 2032A(e)(8), I.R.C., is allowed. John W. Ambrecht and Gregory Arnold, for petitioner. Steven M. Roth, for respondent. MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION MARVEL, Judge: Respondent determined an estate tax deficiency of $775,626 and an addition to tax under section 6662 of $3,844. After concessions,1 the issues for decision are: 1The parties conceded several items in a stipulation of agreed adjustments, filed Sept. 14, 1998. Petitioner's concessions are described therein and will not be repeated here. Respondent has conceded that petitioner is not liable for the addition to tax. On brief, respondent conceded that the fair market values of decedent's interests in two parcels of estate (continued...)Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011