- 55 -
1996 Agreement, we have no confidence that the 1996 Agreement was
comparable to an arm’s-length bargain.
Insofar as the estate has failed to persuade us that the
Modified 1981 Agreement has met the requirements of section
2703(b)(3), the Modified 1981 Agreement must also be disregarded
under section 2703(a) when determining the value of decedent’s
BCC shares for Federal estate tax purposes.
II. Valuation of Decedent’s BCC Shares
Having determined that the Modified 1981 Agreement cannot
control the value of decedent’s BCC stock for Federal estate tax
purposes, we turn next to the task of determining its fair market
value as of the valuation date. In the notice of deficiency,
respondent determined that decedent’s 43,080 BCC shares had a
fair market value of $7,921,975. The burden of proof rests with
the estate to demonstrate that respondent’s determination is
erroneous.29 See Rule 142(a).
A. Fair Market Value
Valuation is a question of fact, and the trier of fact must
weigh all relevant evidence to draw the appropriate inferences.
Commissioner v. Scottish Am. Inv. Co., 323 U.S. 119, 123-125
(1944); Helvering v. Natl. Grocery Co., 304 U.S. 282,
29 The estate has not raised sec. 7491, which would shift
the burden of proof under certain circumstances. Accordingly, we
deem that issue waived.
Page: Previous 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011