Lawmakers aim to pair government funding, stimulus

 

Two taxpayers successfully defended their conservation easement deduction in a recent Tax Court decision, T.C. Memo. 2020-159.

The taxpayers, former NFL defensive lineman Warren Sapp and Dr. Kumar Rajagopalan were members of an LLC that purchased property in western North Carolina for development as a residential subdivision. Rather than develop all 37 lots, it was decided to develop 12 lots with open space on the remainder of the property. As the paperwork on the conservation easement was being worked on lots were being sold. Four of the lots were entered escrow during August 2006, one to Dr. Kumar and the others to unrelated third parties. The LLC obtained financing from a bank with the 12 lots as security for more than it cost to assemble the entire property.

On Nov. 28, 2006, a contribution easement was donated to a qualified charitable organization. The parties to the easement could agree to amendments but only if they were not inconsistent with the conservation purposes. The closing on the properties was delayed to complete access roads and electric service. During this time the real estate market began to crumble. The LLC filed its 2006 tax return reporting a noncash charitable contribution of $4,879,000 for the conservation easement. Attached to the return was a qualified appraisal of the easement. Both taxpayers filed their individual income tax returns reporting the flow-through contribution and attached the qualified appraisals to their returns. The IRS disallowed the deductions and assessed tax and penalties for 2006.

The IRS stipulated that the easement was “exclusively for a conservation purpose.” After the court dismissed the IRS’s contention that the amendment clause violated the required perpetuity provision, the court focused on the valuation of the easement. In a detailed discussion of the valuation rules for conservation easements, the court determined that the best evidence for the valuation would be the actual sales of the lots in the subdivision.

The court determined that based on the evidence presented that the value of the conservation easement is at least the amount claimed on the LLC return and passed through to the taxpayers. After dismissing the valuations by the “experts,” the court noted the unique circumstances surrounding the case and that the taxpayers benefited by granting the easement at the top of the real estate market.

 

 

Contacts:

 
 
Tax professional standards statement

This content supports Grant Thornton LLP’s marketing of professional services and is not written tax advice directed at the particular facts and circumstances of any person. If you are interested in the topics presented herein, we encourage you to contact us or an independent tax professional to discuss their potential application to your particular situation. Nothing herein shall be construed as imposing a limitation on any person from disclosing the tax treatment or tax structure of any matter addressed herein. To the extent this content may be considered to contain written tax advice, any written advice contained in, forwarded with or attached to this content is not intended by Grant Thornton LLP to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code.

The information contained herein is general in nature and is based on authorities that are subject to change. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal or tax advice provided by Grant Thornton LLP to the reader. This material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader’s specific circumstances or needs and may require consideration of tax and nontax factors not described herein. Contact Grant Thornton LLP or other tax professionals prior to taking any action based upon this information. Changes in tax laws or other factors could affect, on a prospective or retroactive basis, the information contained herein; Grant Thornton LLP assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any such changes. All references to “Section,” “Sec.,” or “§” refer to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

 
 

More tax hot topics