- 100 -
jurisdiction is properly invoked, the fair market value of any
property is what this Court determines it is, and a determination
relating to a charitable deduction pursuant to section 2522
requires use of the Court’s fair market value of the transferred
property. Our determination of fair market value is both fair
market value under gift tax principles and as finally determined
for Federal gift tax purposes. Moreover, had petitioners’
assignment agreement included the magical words “as finally
determined for Federal gift tax purposes”, the majority assert
only that they “might have reached a different result.” Majority
op. p. 63.
Fourth, the majority state:
There is simply no provision in the assignment
agreement that contemplates the allocation of the
gifted interest among the assignees based on some
fixed value that might not be determined for several
years. Rather, the assignment agreement contemplates
the allocation of the gifted interest based on the
assignees’ best estimation of that value. [Majority
op. pp. 62-63.]
The fact is, the assignment agreement effected the transfer of an
assignee interest. Petitioners’ assignment agreement could not,
and does not, limit the Court’s ability to correctly determine
the fair market value of such interest. Nor could the assignment
agreement mandate that the donees’ determination of fair market
value is conclusive and final for gift tax purposes.
Finally, unlike respondent, who contends that the charitable
deduction is limited to the $338,967 CFT received in the
Page: Previous 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011