-22-
that valuation date. The Court of Appeals for the Eighth
Circuit, the court to which an appeal of this case most likely
lies, has held specifically that “In determining the value of
unlisted stocks, actual sales made in reasonable amounts at arm’s
length, in the normal course of business, within a reasonable
time before or after the basic date, are the best criterion of
market value.” Estate of Fitts v. Commissioner, supra at 731;
accord Rubber Research, Inc. v. Commissioner, 422 F.2d 1402,
1405-1406 (8th Cir. 1970), affg. T.C. Memo. 1969-24; see also
Estate of Jung v. Commissioner, 101 T.C. 412, 430-432 (1993);
Estate of Scanlan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-331. Although
petitioners observe correctly that the Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit stated in Douglas Hotel Co. v. Commissioner,
190 F.2d at 772, that “Evidence of what property sold for within
a reasonable time before the material date upon which its fair
value is to be determined is universally considered competent,
substantial, and persuasive evidence of its fair value on the
material date”, this statement was made solely with respect to
the evidentiary value of a sale that predated the date of
valuation there. The Court of Appeals did not state as
petitioners ask us to hold that only sales which occur before a
valuation date are probative as to fair market value on the
valuation date. In fact, the Court of Appeals went on to state
specifically as to prior sales that “It is, of course, not the
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011