- 24 - Circuits. Because the decisional law of those circuits, as we understand it, may differ as to when an individual may avoid the tax consequences of his or her apportionment of a purchase price in a written contract, we analyze the law of both circuits. We conclude that the result is the same under the law in both circuits. We also reach the same result under our caselaw. E.g., Gen. Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1967- 143, affd. 401 F.2d 324 (4th Cir. 1968). The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has adopted the rule of Danielson v. Commissioner, 378 F.2d 771 (3d Cir. 1967), vacating and remanding 44 T.C. 549 (1965). Plante v. Commissioner, 168 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 1999), affg. T.C. Memo. 1997-386; Bradley v. United States, 730 F.2d 718, 720 (11th Cir. 1984). Respondent argues here, as he did in Danielson, that where the parties to the sale of a business have entered into a written agreement setting out the amount to be paid for a covenant not to compete, they may not for tax purposes attack that agreement absent fraud, duress, or undue influence. Petitioners have adduced extrinsic evidence to attempt to establish an ambiguity in the apportionment of the Conquest purchase price. We find that evidence unpersuasive. The relevant terms of the stock acquisition and noncompete agreements are clear and unambiguous on their face. Petitioners have not adduced any evidence that would establish that either ofPage: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011