| Fifth
Circuit, Reversing Tax Court, Clarifies Valuation of Privately
Held Corporations
By
Peter C. Barton and Clayton R. Sager
In Estate
of Dunn [301 F.3d 339 (2002), rev. 79 TCM 1337 (2000)],
the Fifth Circuit ruled that the full amount of the corporate
income tax on the sale of assets can be subtracted when using
the asset-based method to value a privately held corporation,
because the asset-based method assumes the assets are sold.
The Fifth Circuit also ruled that the likelihood that a corporation
will be liquidated or sold is relevant only in determining
the weights to be assigned to the earnings-based value and
the asset-based value. Finally, the Fifth Circuit’s
assignment of these weights in Estate of Dunn significantly
reduced the valuation for estate tax purposes.
Prior
Law
Case
law has long established that fair market value is the price
a willing buyer would pay a willing seller, both having
reasonable knowledge of the facts, and neither under compulsion.
In general, when no recent transactions in the stock have
occurred, there are two approaches to valuing a privately
held corporation: the earnings-based method (calculated
using income or cash flow) and the asset-based method.
Revenue
Ruling 59-60, 1959-1 CB 237, specifies the following factors
in determining the fair market value of a privately held
corporation’s stock: earnings; financial position
and book value; economic and industry outlook; management
skills; dividend-paying capacity; goodwill; the size of
the block of stock; and the value of similar businesses.
Revenue Ruling 59-60 also states that, in general, earnings
may be the most important criterion when valuing a business
selling products or services, whereas the value of the assets
may be most important in valuing an investment or holding
company.
Facts
of Dunn
Beatrice
Dunn, owner of 63% of Dunn Equipment common stock, died
in 1991. Dunn Equipment rents heavy equipment, with or without
trained operators. From 1987 to 1991, Dunn Equipment paid
no dividends, its officers were paid relatively low compensation,
and it had an average annual cash flow of $286,421. In 1991,
with assets of approximately $8.27 million and liabilities
of $7.3 million, Dunn Equipment was a viable operating company
with 134 employees and strong community ties. To sell, liquidate,
or merge Dunn Equipment required a super majority (two-thirds
vote of the outstanding shares) under state law.
On
the estate tax return, decedent’s Dunn Equipment stock
was valued at $1,635,465. The IRS valued the stock at $2,229,043
in the deficiency notice. Subsequently, in Tax Court filings,
the IRS valued the stock at $4,430,238. The estate’s
expert argued for assigning equal weight to the earnings-based
value and the asset-based value, and for a 34% reduction
to the asset-based value for the corporate income tax on
liquidation of Dunn Equipment. This income tax flows from
the accrued taxable gains on the disposal of equipment.
The IRS based its value solely on the asset-based method,
arguing that the lower value from the earnings-based method
should be ignored because of the large difference between
the two methods’ results. The IRS also allowed no
reduction for income tax. Both parties subtracted discounts
for lack of super-majority control and lack of marketability.
Tax
Court Ruling
In
its ruling, the Tax Court assigned a 35% weight to the earnings-based
value and a 65% weight to the asset-based value, and then
allowed a 5% reduction for income taxes from the asset-based
value. The Tax Court ruled that the full asset-based value
of Dunn Equipment was $7,922,892, and the full earnings-based
value, using cash flow, was $1,321,740. Furthermore, the
Tax Court allowed the two discounts, resulting in a value
for the decedent’s 63% ownership interest of $2,738,558,
which exceeded the value reported on the estate tax return
by more than $1 million. The Tax Court noted, following
Revenue Ruling 59-60, that perhaps no weight should be assigned
to the asset-based value for an operating business. However,
the court found that Dunn Equipment was at a low point in
its business cycle in 1991; therefore, the low earnings-based
value required a 65% weighting for the higher asset-based
value to produce the correct overall value. Regarding the
reduction from the asset-based value for income tax on the
sale of assets, the Tax Court ruled that because the likelihood
of liquidation for Dunn Equipment was low, the reduction
should be 5%, not 34%. The estate appealed both this 5%
ruling and the Tax Court’s assignment of the relative
weights.
Fifth
Circuit Ruling
The
Fifth Circuit reduced the asset-based weight to 15%, increased
the earnings-based weight to 85%, and allowed the full 34%
reduction for income tax. The Fifth Circuit rejected the
IRS’ contention that no weight should be given to
the earnings-based value as “legally and factually
absurd,” and characterized the Tax Court’s 65%
weight to the asset-based value as “inconsistent with
all findings and expressions of the court.” Agreeing
with the Tax Court’s findings that Dunn Equipment’s
liquidation was unlikely, that its fixed assets (the equipment)
were not appreciating, and that it would continue as an
operating business in the short and long term, the Fifth
Circuit assigned a low weight to the asset-based value.
The Fifth Circuit further found that Dunn Equipment was
not at a low point in its business cycle, but rather that
its earnings had been flat for the previous 10 years and
were not expected to increase.
Regarding
the reduction for income tax, the Fifth Circuit ruled that
a buyer wanting to acquire a corporation’s assets
that buys a majority block of its stock would insist that
the price reflect a reduction for the full dollar amount
of income tax on the sale of these assets. The asset-based
method assumes the assets will be sold, either by Dunn Equipment
to the willing buyer, or by the willing buyer of the stock
to a third party. Therefore, the likelihood of liquidation
is irrelevant. Conversely, this reduction for income tax
would not enter into calculating the earnings-based value
because the willing buyer would retain the assets to operate
the business. Based on the Fifth Circuit’s rulings,
and after subtracting the two discounts, the decedent’s
stock would be valued at approximately $1,130,000, which
is approximately $500,000 less than the estate tax return
value.
Favorable
Implications
Estate
of Dunn provides taxpayers with two favorable rulings
concerning the valuation of privately held corporations.
Even though Dunn Equipment did not have significant cash
flow, the fact that it was an operating business with reasons
for not liquidating persuaded the Fifth Circuit to heavily
weigh the earnings-based method, resulting in a much lower
valuation. Of course, this ruling is most helpful in cases
where the asset-based value significantly exceeds the earnings-based
value. In addition, to the extent that the asset-based method
determines the stock’s value, income tax on the sale
of assets can be subtracted from that value.
Even
though Estate of Dunn is binding only in the Fifth
Circuit, the opinion is well reasoned and may affect future
decisions in other circuits or in the Tax Court.
Peter
C. Barton, JD, CPA, is a professor of accounting,
and Clayton R. Sager, PhD, is an associate
professor of accounting, both at the University of Wisconsin–Whitewater. |