- 91 -
exactly as contemplated in the assignment agreement
(without recourse to arbitration), and none can
complain that they got any less or more than
petitioners intended them to get. * * * [Majority op.
p. 63.]
The assignment agreement does not “contemplate”, as the
majority opinion states, that the allocation of the gifted
interest be “based on the assignees’ best estimation of that
[fair market] value.” Id. Under the assignment agreement,
petitioners transferred to the donees specified portions of the
gifted interest determined by reference to the fair market value
of such portions, as defined in that agreement, and not upon some
“best estimation of that value.”
The assignment agreement required that the allocation be
based upon fair market value as defined in that agreement, which
the majority opinion acknowledges is the same definition of that
term for Federal gift tax purposes. The majority opinion has
found that the donees did not make the allocation on the basis of
that definition. The donees thus failed to implement the donors’
(i.e., petitioners’) mandate in the assignment agreement when
they arrived at amounts which they believed to be the respective
fair market values of the specified portions of the gifted
interest that petitioners transferred to them but which the
majority opinion has found are not the fair market values of such
portions.
Page: Previous 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011