- 84 -
petitioners retained the voting and the other rights in the MIL
limited partnership associated with the assignee interest
transferred to charity. Because the rights retained by
petitioners with regard to their MIL limited partnership interest
would be treated as substantial, under section 170(f)(3)(B)(ii)
the portion thereof transferred to CFT would appear not to
qualify as an undivided portion of petitioners’ entire MIL
limited partnership interest.
I would reiterate that it is the perceived substantial
significance of petitioners’ retained rights on which petitioners
themselves, petitioners’ valuation experts, and the majority
opinion rely to justify assignee status and increased valuation
discounts for the gifted interest.
It would appear that for the above analysis not to apply to
the gift involved in the instant case, petitioners’ MIL limited
partnership interest would have to be interpreted as consisting
of two separate and distinct interests (an economic interest and
a noneconomic interest) with petitioners transferring to CFT an
undivided portion of the separate economic interest.
I submit that the correct interpretation would be to treat
petitioners’ MIL limited partnership interest as one interest
consisting of both economic and noneconomic rights, with
petitioners having transferred to CFT only their economic rights
therein. Under this interpretation, it would appear that
Page: Previous 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011