- 114 -
the idea to Mr. Harris, who “did not object” to the use of tax
book value in the special case of the True companies. Dave True
then obtained the B. Allen report to fulfill his due diligence
requirements, given the perceived threat of gift tax litigation.
Even petitioners qualified their assertion that Dave True relied
on the B. Allen report to assess whether to use a tax book value
formula by stating on brief: “but, in reality, Dave True likely
relied primarily on his own knowledge of the value of True Oil.”
We have often found that failure to obtain comparables or
appraisals to determine a buy-sell agreement’s formula price
indicates testamentary intent. See, e.g., Bommer Revocable Trust
v. Commissioner, supra; Lauder II; cf. Estate of Hall v.
Commissioner, 92 T.C. 312 (1989)(holding that the buy-sell price
reflected fair market value, due in part to the efforts expended
by the corporation to test the reasonableness of the adjusted
book value formula). Moreover, cases in which the lack of
outside appraisals did not evidence a testamentary intent
involved buy-sell agreements between persons that were not the
natural objects of the decedent’s bounty. See, e.g., Estate of
Bischoff v. Commissioner, 69 T.C. at 42 n.10.; Bensel v.
Commissioner, 36 B.T.A. at 252-254.
f. Exclusion of Significant Assets From
Formula Price
In Lauder II, we questioned the propriety of expressly
excluding the value of all intangible assets from the book value
Page: Previous 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011