Ten Twenty Six Investors v. Commissioner

The Tax Court disallowed the deduction in its entirety because it held that the easement had zero value. The Tax Court found the taxpayers' expert witness appraisers unconvincing, based on numerous methodological flaws.

The Tax Court held for the IRS, finding that the cash and easement gifts were rendered conditional by the side letter and so disallowed the deduction.

Lumpkin One Five Six LLC v. Commissioner - June 2020.pdf In a proceeds clause case with the improvement deduction language, the Tax Court denied the deductions in full, following Oakbrook Land Holdings LLC, v. Commissioner and Coal Property Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner. The Tax Court declined to consider the IRS' argument on the floating building areas.

The 11th Circuit vacated part of the Tax Court decision that disallowed the charitable deduction based on the improvements clause in the termination proceeds provision but affirmed the Tax Court’s decision on the valuation penalty.

Tax Court held that the taxpayer was entitled to a charitable contribution despite its failure to comply with several requirements.

In an April 2016 opinion the Tax Court held that the easement failed to qualify for a deduction due to the absence of a timely mortgage subordination. The court also noted that Missouri's statute of frauds requires a written agreement where any interest in land is involved.

Relying on Addis v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 528 (2002), affd. 374 F.3d 881 (9th Cir. 2004), the Tax Court disallowed the charitable deduction because the contemporaneous written acknowledgment failed to include part of the consideration HCAC received and rejected the substantial compliance argument.

The District Court ruled for the IRS on summary judgment, holding that the failure to comply with I.R.C. § 170(f)(8) was, in and of itself, fatal to the deduction claim. The court rejected substantial compliance.

Following Mitchell v. Commissioner, 138 T.C. 324, 332 (2012), the Tax Court held that the easement did not qualify under Treas. Reg. 1.170A14(g)(2) because of the failure to subordinate the mortgage at the time of the easement conveyance.

IRS disallowed a CE deduction in full due to missing basis on Form 8283.Tax Court found for the IRS that taxpayer had not substantially complied and that the information is reasonably obtainable and necessary. The tax court follows that of RERI Holdings I, LLC v. Commissioner, 149 T.C. No. 1.