Share
    Document

    A deep (and refreshing) breath

    Posted 2020 Reviewed June 28, 2022
    Source
    Land Trust Alliance
    Author
    Diana Norris
    About This Document

    In the recent case Pine Mountain Preserve v. Commissioner, the Eleventh Circuit advised conscious breathing. So everyone took a deep breath, including the court, who then simplified the complicated tax regulations and analyses, making them accessible concepts. And even better, to reduce the stress, the court's analysis completely tracked arguments that the Land Trust Alliance had made.

    Diana Norris is conservation defense associate director at the Land Trust Alliance.

    © 2026 Land Trust Alliance, Inc. All rights reserved.

    Disclaimer

    These resources are provided "as is" for informational purposes only, without warranty of any kind. They do not constitute legal or professional advice and do not create an attorney-client relationship. They may not reflect current legal developments and should be adapted for your organization with qualified professional help. The Alliance is not liable for any damages arising from use of or reliance on these resources. Views in individual posts and third-party links/logos are not Alliance endorsements. The Alliance is committed to equal opportunity and does not condone unlawful discrimination.

    For accreditation-related materials, please also consult the Land Trust Accreditation Commission website.

    Deep breathing in times of stress can slow heartbeats and lower blood pressure. But when a federal court instructs you to take a "deep breath," what is your mind and body to do?

    In the recent case Pine Mountain Preserve v. Commissioner, the Eleventh Circuit advised conscious breathing. So everyone took a deep breath, including the court, who then simplified the complicated tax regulations and analyses, making them accessible concepts. And even better, to reduce the stress, the court's analysis completely tracked arguments that the Land Trust Alliance had made.

    And what was all the stress about? The IRS had challenged an easement and its charitable deduction based on two main questions: first, does a sound amendment clause disqualify an easement deduction, and second, can a land trust and landowner designate build areas but move them later. The IRS had taken the position that any amendment clause automatically disallowed the deduction and build areas cannot be moved — even when the land trust's approval is required.

    Advocating for land trusts and sound land conservation, the Alliance opposed the IRS' positions and argued for including a principled amendment clause, allowing flexibility in build areas in order to protect conservation values in perpetuity. The court agreed and even acknowledged the deference Congress intended for land trusts, recognizing that land trusts are in the best position to make these decisions.

    Questions remain about the permitted extent, use, size and location of build areas and the full impact of this case, which was sent back to Tax Court for a revised opinion. The Alliance will continue to represent land trusts' interests in court to bring clarity to the situation. In the meantime, we drafted practical suggestions for land trusts on amendments) and building areas as part of our Practical Pointers.

    More will come from the IRS and the courts, but for the moment, we can take a deep breath and then let go a sigh of relief. Enjoy the moment. It was a great win for land trusts and land conservation.