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


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