Divorce Mediation Blog

Rule 2704 Opposition - Talking Points

Wednesday, November 23, 2016

Recently, we blogged about the Internal Revenue Service proposed new section 2704 rules, which if enacted in their current form would create a new minimum value for businesses subject to intra-family transactions, and essentially eliminate discounts for marketability in that context.

Many in the business appraisal and estate planning communities are up in arms, and they mobilizing to defeat this IRS move, before it becomes entrenched.

While keeping an eye on unfolding commentary, we ran across “talking points” suggested by the American Society of Appraisers for use in opposing the new regulations. In summary they are:

  1. By increasing the value of fractional interests in family businesses, the new rules would result in an "stealth" tax increase of 25-50% in estate and gift taxes.
  2. By treating intra-family actors as "known parties", rather than hypothetical buyers and sellers, the rule would disregard the reality that a fractional interest is in fact, fractional, and not controlling, reducing its economic value.
  3. The notion that families will always work in concert has been rejected previously by the United States Supreme Court.
  4. The suggestion that intra-family transfers should be treated differently than those between unrelated parties is unsupported by any public reasoning advanced by the IRS.
  5. The proposed rule may put IRS regulations on a collision course with various state laws which recognize applicability of marketability discounts.
  6. This new approach will cause family-owned businesses to delay capital investment, and inhibit new hiring, as they preserve cash for pain increased taxes.

As divorce mediators and arbitrators, a former Probate judge, and litigators-in-recovery, we are used to this approach from Bernier, in the divorce context, but in estate and gift taxation?

What do you think?

Get e-mail notifications of new blog posts! Enter email address below.:

Delivered by FeedBurner

other articles

recent posts


divorce litigation divorce arbitrators Defense of Marriage Act high-risk methodology mediators disputes COLA conciliation Chouteau Levine family law mediation arbitrator SJC alimony family law health insurance Levine Dispute Resolutions Same Sex Marriage divorce agreement divorced fraud dispute resolution how baseball arbitration works Massachusetts Alimony Reform Act medical benefits mediations divorce and family law mediators separation IRC §2704 lawyers Levine Dispute Resolution Center med/arb family law arbitrator General term alimony Matrimonial Arbitration alimony statute private dispute resolution Massachusetts alimony divorce mediation divorce judgment MLB labor agreement Massachusetts divorce arbitrator Massachusetts lawyers lawyer-attended mediation resolve disputes Twinkies annulment child support mediator arbitrators Uniform Arbitration Act divorce process divorce mediations LDRC health coverage family mediation alimony law mediation Divorce Agreements lawyer divorce and family law Baseball Players Child Support Guidelines rehabilitative alimony divorce mediator special master Alimony Reform Act Levine Dispute Resolution Center LLC DOMA alimony reform legislation Major League Baseball Arbitration facilitated negotiations Boston Family Law Arbitration family law arbitrators alimony orders arbitration family support family and probate law disputes Obamacare traditional negotiations litigation self-adjusting alimony Massachusetts divorce mediators Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly divorce lawyers Cohabitation divorce arbitration Self-adjusting alimony orders support orders divorce mediators med-arb Divorce Massachusetts alimony and child support pre-ARA alimony Massachusetts divorce lawyers Baseball Arbitration The Seven Sins of Alimony Baseball Levine Dispute Resolution