Joshua Tree Enterprises

Sign Up for Newsletter

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by lsaret published on September 4, 2009 3:50 PM.

Report by the Tax Policy Center: "The Distribution of Federal Taxes, 2009-2012" was the previous entry in this blog.

Swiss Private Bank Advises Its Clients to Exit All Direct Investment in US is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Steve Akers' Summary of Keller v. US

TrackBacks (0) Comments (0)

Steve Akers, Associate Fiduciary Counsel, Bessemer Trust, provides the following summary of Keller v. U.S., Civil Action No. V-02-62 (S.D. Tex. August 20, 2009).

40 Million Taxpayer Victory; Partnership Recognized Although Not Formally Funded Before Decedent's Death; 47.5% Discount Allowed For Assignee Interest in Limited Partnership Holding Bond Portfolio; Bona Fide Sale Exception to Sections 2036 and 2038 Applied; Interest on Loan to Borrow Money From Partnership After Death to Pay Estate Taxes and Other Obligations Is Deductible For Estate Tax Purposes

In this $40 million estate tax refund case (published about 2 1/2 years after a four-day trial), the court ruled in favor of the estate on all counts.

  • A family limited partnership was recognized even though it had not been formally funded before the decedent's death. The court concluded that the decedent had expressed the clear intent to fund the partnership with specifically identified assets, and under Texas law that caused the assets to become partnership assets.
  • The bona fide sale exception to ยงยง2036 and 2038 applied because the partnership was genuine, there was a legitimate business purpose for the partnership (protecting family assets from divorce proceedings and facilitating the administration of family assets) and because the decedent retained significant assets outside the partnership.
  • The estate's interest in the partnership was valued as an assignee interest. The court accepted the taxpayer's valuation expert's opinion, resulting in a discount of 47.5% with respect to the bonds and cash in the partnership. (The IRS's expert's opinion was rejected because it violated several of the tenets of the hypothetical willing buyer-willing seller valuation principle.)
  • The estate borrowed $114 million from the partnership to pay estate taxes and other debts. The interest on the 9-year loan was deductible for estate tax purposes because the interest expense was actually and necessarily incurred in the administration of the estate.
Please click here for a more detailed analysis of the Keller case.

Posted by Lewis J. Saret, General Editor, Wealth Strategies Journal.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Steve Akers' Summary of Keller v. US.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.wealthstrategiesjournal.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2207

Leave a comment