- 17 - testimony if it is within the range of values that may be properly derived from consideration of all the evidence. Id. After considering the parties arguments, all the facts and circumstances relevant to this case, and the opinions of petitioners’ and respondent’s experts, we conclude that the fair market value of the shares of HII stock that Mr. Hess gave to the trust falls somewhere in the middle of the range of values suggested by the parties and their experts.16 Mr. Heebink’s Expert Opinion Mr. Heebink arrived at a value of $128,000 per share for the HII stock.17 His valuation relied upon a discounted cashflow analysis and a market comparable analysis. However, as we explain in more detail below, Mr. Heebink’s valuation analysis relies upon an adjustment to HII’s financial information, which resulted in a significant decrease in HII’s earnings figures for 16Generally, the Commissioner’s determination of fair market value bears a presumption of correctness, and the burden of proving that determination is incorrect rests with the taxpayer. See Rule 142(a). However, in certain circumstances, the burden of proof as to that determination shifts to the Commissioner under sec. 7491(a). Petitioners do not argue that sec. 7491(a) applies, and the record does not disclose the date the examination commenced. 17Mr. Heebink prepared four reports for this case. He determined the fair market value of HII shares as of Nov. 11, 1995; he prepared a supplemental report in which he addressed items that respondent’s expert relied upon in his report; he valued HII shares as of Feb. 26, 1995, the date the redemption agreement was executed; and he valued the 8-year covenant as of that date.Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011