- 182 -
The peculiar circumstances of the cases at hand warrant our
inquiries into, and ultimate findings of, intermediate values for
the True companies that exceed tax book values but are less than
the values determined by respondent in the notices. As discussed
at length under issue 1 of this opinion, petitioners’ buy-sell
agreements requiring sales of interests in the True companies at
tax book value virtually assured unrealistically low entity
values for certain companies. This was due to the use of (1)
accelerated depreciation methods by capital intensive companies
and (2) enhanced write-offs of substantial asset costs and
capital expenditures of the ranching and oil and gas companies.
Thus, the method of accounting used to derive tax book values
provided a basis for our holding that the buy-sell agreements
were testamentary devices and for our hypothesis--without regard
to the presumption of correctness or the burden of proof in
sustaining or overturning the determinations in the notices--that
petitioners’ values did not accurately represent fair market
value and that higher values would be appropriate.
Accordingly, we have not relied on the presumption of
correctness or the burden of proof to decide the cases at hand.
We have based our findings of value on our own examination of
evidence in the record, including expert reports, published
studies, witness testimony, exhibits, and joint stipulations of
fact. See infra pp. 186-287; see also Burns v. Commissioner, 36
Page: Previous 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011