- 35 -
are claimed. However, the reporting requirements do
not relate to the substance or essence of whether or
not a charitable contribution was actually made. We
conclude, therefore, that the reporting requirements
are directory and not mandatory. [Id. at 41; citation
omitted.]
Bond involved the contribution of two blimps to a qualified
charity. The parties agreed upon the value, the fact that the
appraiser was qualified, and all other regulatory requirements
except whether the taxpayers’ failure to obtain and attach to
their return a separate written appraisal containing the
information specified in the regulations would result in the
disallowance of a charitable contribution deduction. The Court
noted that substantially all of the information specified in the
regulations had been provided, except the qualifications of the
appraiser on the Form 8283 attached to the return. The Court
concluded that the taxpayers in Bond had substantially complied
and that disallowance of the deduction under those circumstances
would be too harsh a sanction (essentially that the purposes of
the statute had been substantially achieved).
Subsequently, in Hewitt v. Commissioner, 109 T.C. 258
(1997), the Court again considered these regulations in a
situation where taxpayers donated to a charitable organization
their shares of stock of a corporation that was not publicly
traded. They claimed deductions in amounts that the parties
agreed represented the fair market value of the stock. However,
Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008