-202-
894 (7th Cir. 1985) (“a rule has developed that subsequent events
are not considered in fixing fair market value, except to the
extent that they were reasonably foreseeable at the date of
valuation”).
Two years after Hewes, the Board adopted the ATB’s
recommendation that fair market value be determined by viewing
neither the willing buyer nor the willing seller as being under a
compulsion to buy or to sell the item subject to valuation.
Hudson River Woolen Mills v. Commissioner, 9 B.T.A. 862, 868
(1927). After that case, the Board observed that neither the
willing buyer nor the willing seller was an actual person but was
viewed as a hypothetical person mindful of all relevant facts.
Natl. Water Main Cleaning Co. v. Commissioner, 16 B.T.A. 223
(1929); accord Estate of Bright v. United States, 658 F.2d 999,
1005-1006 (5th Cir. 1981) (clarifies that the views of both a
hypothetical buyer and a hypothetical seller must be taken into
account, and that the characteristics of each hypothetical person
may differ from the personal characteristics of the actual seller
or a particular buyer); Kolom v. Commissioner, 644 F.2d 1282,
1288 (9th Cir. 1981) (same), affg. 71 T.C. 235 (1978); Pabst
Brewing Co. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-506 (focusing too
much on the view of one hypothetical person, to the neglect of
the view of the other, is contrary to a determination of fair
market value); cf. Estate of Andrews v. Commissioner, 79 T.C.
Page: Previous 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011