- 19 -
other factors that are peculiar to the individual
decedent, his estate, or his beneficiaries.
Consideration would have to be given in a case such as
the instant one, for example, as to when the estate is
likely to distribute the * * * [asset] to the
beneficiaries, and thereafter, to each beneficiary's
unused capital loss carryovers, his possible tax
planning to reduce future taxes on the gain included in
each installment, his tax bracket both currently and in
the future, his marital status, and other factors. The
willing buyer-willing seller test, though it may not be
perfect, provides a more reasonable standard for
determining value, and it must be followed. [Fn. ref.
omitted.]
By following the estate’s line of reasoning, we would have to
consider intricacies in every valuation case that would eliminate
the “hypothetical” element of the willing buyer-willing seller
test. The decision in Estate of Curry v. United States, 706 F.2d
1424 (7th Cir. 1983), summarizes the consequence if courts and
administrative bodies determining valuation consistently took the
subjective circumstances of the seller into account: “To hold
otherwise would be to command future * * * [judges] to wade into
the thicket of personal [and] corporate idiosyncrasies and
non-market motives as part of their valuation quest, thus doing
great damage to the uniformity, stability, and predictability of
tax law administration.” Id. at 1431. Here, we must decline the
opportunity that the estate has given us to eschew this important
concept underlying the willing buyer-willing seller test.
b. Lottery Cases
The estate cites several cases in the area of estate asset
valuation that examine the issue of whether unassignable lottery
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011