- 16 -
Each party relies on an expert opinion. We evaluate expert
opinions in light of all the evidence in the record and may
accept or reject expert testimony, in whole or in part, according
to our own judgment. Helvering v. Natl. Grocery Co., 304 U.S.
282, 295 (1938); Shepherd v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 376 (2000),
affd. 283 F.3d 1258 (11th Cir. 2002). We may be selective in our
use of any part of an expert’s opinion. Estate of Davis v.
Commissioner, 110 T.C. 530, 538 (1998).
1. The Estate’s Expert
The estate’s expert, Gary L. Schroeder, is accredited by the
American Society of Appraisers as a senior appraiser in the
valuation of businesses and intangible assets. He has been
actively engaged in the appraisal and consulting profession since
1981. Mr. Schroeder determined that, as of September 26, 1997,
the fair market value of 100 percent of the shares of RBI stock,
on a controlling-interest basis, was $25,900,000. He determined
a $12,900,000 aggregate value for RBI stock after allowing a 17-
7(...continued)
with examinations commencing after July 22, 1998, if certain
requirements are met under sec. 7491(a), the burden of proof
shall be on the Commissioner as to any factual issue relevant to
ascertaining the tax liability of the taxpayer. See Internal
Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L.
105-206, sec. 3001(c), 112 Stat. 727. The examination in the
instant case commenced after July 22, 1998. Nevertheless,
neither party addresses whether the requirements of sec. 7491(a)
have been met, and, in any event, we do not decide any factual
issue on the basis of which party bears the burden of proof.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011