- 196 - Respondent derived a marketable controlling value for the interest valued as of Dave True’s death at $34,200,000. d. Court’s Analysis The positions of the parties and the Court’s determination of the marketable minority values of True Oil’s total equity at each of the valuation dates are summarized infra pp. 215-216. In the cases at hand, we find that exclusive use by petitioners’ experts of the guideline company method to calculate True Oil’s marketable minority value is inappropriate. We recognize that market-based approaches are helpful tools for determining fair market value of unlisted stock. See sec. 20.2031-2(f), Estate Tax Regs; Rev. Rul. 59-60, sec. 3.03, 1959-1 C.B. at 238. However, in the case of an ongoing business, courts generally will not restrict consideration to only one valuation approach. See Hamm v. Commissioner, 325 F.2d 934, 941 (8th Cir. 1963), affg. T.C. Memo. 1961-347; Ward v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 78, 102 (1986); Estate of Andrews v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. at 945; Portland Mfg. Co. v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 58, 80 (1971), affd. without published opinion (9th Cir. 1975); Trianon Hotel Co. v. Commissioner, 30 T.C. 156, 181 (1958); Hooper v. Commissioner, 41 B.T.A. 114, 129 (1940). We find it unreasonable to assume that a hypothetical willing buyer would rely entirely on public company multiples toPage: Previous 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011