- 15 -
Further, Mr. Renbarger’s choice to advertise five of
approximately 60 properties constituted too limited an attempt to
raise sufficient capital to pay the Federal estate tax. By Mr.
Renbarger’s own admission, proceeds from the five properties
would not fully satisfy the estate’s Federal tax liability, but
rather would make a “big impact" toward that liability.
Regardless, Mr. Renbarger refused to advertise more properties
because, he testified, he saw no reason to deviate from his plan,
despite not receiving a single offer by the payment due date.
This sentiment runs counter to the mandated duties of an executor
and the obligations of an estate in meeting Federal estate tax
obligations. Here, the estate’s properties were situated in four
States and 21 counties. Additional properties could have been
advertised for sale, and contrary to testimony from one of the
estate’s experts, without worry of depressing prices in any
single local market. Overall, we find Mr. Renbarger’s plan did
not constitute the serious effort required to pay the Federal
estate tax timely.
IV. Whether the Estate Faced Cessation of a Going Concern
Mr. Renbarger argues that the estate would have suffered an
undue hardship to pay the Federal estate tax by the payment due
date. Mr. Renbarger relies on Estate of La Meres v.
Commissioner, 98 T.C. 294 (1992), for this proposition. We find
the facts in Estate of La Meres distinctly different from the
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011