- 18 - beneficiaries.” Ahmanson Found. v. United States, 674 F.2d 761, 768 (9th Cir. 1981). Such predistribution transformations are of a different genre, and must be distinguished from, “changes in value resulting from the fact that under the decedent’s estate plan the assets in the gross estate ultimately come to rest in the hands of different beneficiaries.” Id. Moreover, as a general premise and absent a predistribution transformation of the type described above, “the fair market value of the non-voting stock in the hands of an estate with sufficient shares of voting stock to ensure the estate’s control of a corporation cannot be less than the value of the estate’s voting stock.” Estate of Curry v. United States, 706 F.2d 1424, 1427 & n.2 (7th Cir. 1983). Hence, in such circumstances stockholdings are typically viewed as an aggregate interest in the corporate concern. In the present matter, however, petitioners characterize the Redemption Agreement as working a transformation which altered decedent’s interest prior to its distribution. Consequently, they aver that the interest which passed at death was decedent’s interest in SSE as impacted by and subject to the terms of the Redemption Agreement. Respondent, on the other hand, asserts that decedent’s two-thirds interest in SSE was in no manner transformed before its distribution from the gross estate. Rather, according to respondent, the value-lessening restrictionsPage: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011