Sub S Valuation: To Tax Effect, or Not to Tax Effect, Is Not Really the Question
The valuation of Subchapter S corporations is an important tax related issue for small corporations. For the 2008 tax year, Service data indicates that approximately 4 million Subchapter S corporations, with almost 7 million shareholders and total receipts of over $6.1 trillion, filed tax returns. T...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Tax lawyer 2012-03, Vol.65 (3), p.555-589 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 589 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 555 |
| container_title | The Tax lawyer |
| container_volume | 65 |
| creator | TINKELMAN, DANIEL VISWANATH, P.V. VOGEL, GLEN M. |
| description | The valuation of Subchapter S corporations is an important tax related issue for small corporations. For the 2008 tax year, Service data indicates that approximately 4 million Subchapter S corporations, with almost 7 million shareholders and total receipts of over $6.1 trillion, filed tax returns. This represents approximately 69% of the nearly 5.85 million tax returns filed by all corporations. Every year, some Subchapter S shareholders die, some get divorced, and some have disputes with other shareholders. After any of these events, valuation of S corporation shares is necessary to determine estate and gift taxes, divorce settlements, and equitable division of corporate ownership interests, as well as for a variety of other purposes. In Gross v. Commissioner, the Tax Court agreed with the testimony of an expert testifying for the Service regarding the valuation of an estate as of 1992. Here, the expert testified that tax effecting at normal corporate rates was inappropriate. |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1355014423</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A306972081</galeid><jstor_id>41639203</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A306972081</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g1553-fd196bf19b60d2acca8435bb24bfd7f646ea9079b641101fbe486a4f9bc9fdcb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptjV1LwzAYhYsoOKc_QQh4a-XNR7PGuzGmDoZfm-JdSdJkdnTNTFJw_97OCTIY78UL5zznnKOkRygRKYdcHCc9AAYpQPZxmpyFsASggEH0kudZq9AMvcu6lbFyzS2aOzSX32hsrdHxGjmPHl1EcV-dhF_11ci63qD4adBLa8K24Dw5sbIO5uLv95O3u_F89JBOn-4no-E0XeAso6ktseDKYqE4lERqLXNGM6UIU7YcWM64kQIGnc0wBmyVYTmXzAqlhS21ov3kate79u5ru10sXeubbrLANMsAM0boP7WQtSmqxrropV5VQRdDClwMCOS4o9ID1MI0xsvaNcZWnbzH3xzguyvNqtIHA5e7wDJE54u1r1bSbwqGORUEKP0BQdl-kQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1355014423</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sub S Valuation: To Tax Effect, or Not to Tax Effect, Is Not Really the Question</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>TINKELMAN, DANIEL ; VISWANATH, P.V. ; VOGEL, GLEN M.</creator><creatorcontrib>TINKELMAN, DANIEL ; VISWANATH, P.V. ; VOGEL, GLEN M.</creatorcontrib><description>The valuation of Subchapter S corporations is an important tax related issue for small corporations. For the 2008 tax year, Service data indicates that approximately 4 million Subchapter S corporations, with almost 7 million shareholders and total receipts of over $6.1 trillion, filed tax returns. This represents approximately 69% of the nearly 5.85 million tax returns filed by all corporations. Every year, some Subchapter S shareholders die, some get divorced, and some have disputes with other shareholders. After any of these events, valuation of S corporation shares is necessary to determine estate and gift taxes, divorce settlements, and equitable division of corporate ownership interests, as well as for a variety of other purposes. In Gross v. Commissioner, the Tax Court agreed with the testimony of an expert testifying for the Service regarding the valuation of an estate as of 1992. Here, the expert testified that tax effecting at normal corporate rates was inappropriate.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0040-005X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2329-6089</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Section of Taxation, American Bar Association</publisher><subject>Basis (Taxation) ; Breach of contract ; Business structures ; Business valuation ; C corporations ; Corporate income taxes ; Corporate taxes ; Corporations ; Discounts ; Dividends ; Expert witness testimony ; Fair market value ; Fair value ; Federal court decisions ; Income tax returns ; Income taxes ; Laws, regulations and rules ; S corporation ; S corporations ; Shareholders ; State court decisions ; Stockholders ; Tax court decisions ; Tax courts ; Tax rates ; Tax returns ; Taxation ; Taxes ; Valuation</subject><ispartof>The Tax lawyer, 2012-03, Vol.65 (3), p.555-589</ispartof><rights>2012 American Bar Association</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2012 American Bar Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Bar Association Spring 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41639203$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/41639203$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,801,58000,58233</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>TINKELMAN, DANIEL</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VISWANATH, P.V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VOGEL, GLEN M.</creatorcontrib><title>Sub S Valuation: To Tax Effect, or Not to Tax Effect, Is Not Really the Question</title><title>The Tax lawyer</title><description>The valuation of Subchapter S corporations is an important tax related issue for small corporations. For the 2008 tax year, Service data indicates that approximately 4 million Subchapter S corporations, with almost 7 million shareholders and total receipts of over $6.1 trillion, filed tax returns. This represents approximately 69% of the nearly 5.85 million tax returns filed by all corporations. Every year, some Subchapter S shareholders die, some get divorced, and some have disputes with other shareholders. After any of these events, valuation of S corporation shares is necessary to determine estate and gift taxes, divorce settlements, and equitable division of corporate ownership interests, as well as for a variety of other purposes. In Gross v. Commissioner, the Tax Court agreed with the testimony of an expert testifying for the Service regarding the valuation of an estate as of 1992. Here, the expert testified that tax effecting at normal corporate rates was inappropriate.</description><subject>Basis (Taxation)</subject><subject>Breach of contract</subject><subject>Business structures</subject><subject>Business valuation</subject><subject>C corporations</subject><subject>Corporate income taxes</subject><subject>Corporate taxes</subject><subject>Corporations</subject><subject>Discounts</subject><subject>Dividends</subject><subject>Expert witness testimony</subject><subject>Fair market value</subject><subject>Fair value</subject><subject>Federal court decisions</subject><subject>Income tax returns</subject><subject>Income taxes</subject><subject>Laws, regulations and rules</subject><subject>S corporation</subject><subject>S corporations</subject><subject>Shareholders</subject><subject>State court decisions</subject><subject>Stockholders</subject><subject>Tax court decisions</subject><subject>Tax courts</subject><subject>Tax rates</subject><subject>Tax returns</subject><subject>Taxation</subject><subject>Taxes</subject><subject>Valuation</subject><issn>0040-005X</issn><issn>2329-6089</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNptjV1LwzAYhYsoOKc_QQh4a-XNR7PGuzGmDoZfm-JdSdJkdnTNTFJw_97OCTIY78UL5zznnKOkRygRKYdcHCc9AAYpQPZxmpyFsASggEH0kudZq9AMvcu6lbFyzS2aOzSX32hsrdHxGjmPHl1EcV-dhF_11ci63qD4adBLa8K24Dw5sbIO5uLv95O3u_F89JBOn-4no-E0XeAso6ktseDKYqE4lERqLXNGM6UIU7YcWM64kQIGnc0wBmyVYTmXzAqlhS21ov3kate79u5ru10sXeubbrLANMsAM0boP7WQtSmqxrropV5VQRdDClwMCOS4o9ID1MI0xsvaNcZWnbzH3xzguyvNqtIHA5e7wDJE54u1r1bSbwqGORUEKP0BQdl-kQ</recordid><startdate>20120322</startdate><enddate>20120322</enddate><creator>TINKELMAN, DANIEL</creator><creator>VISWANATH, P.V.</creator><creator>VOGEL, GLEN M.</creator><general>Section of Taxation, American Bar Association</general><general>American Bar Association</general><scope>ILT</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X1</scope><scope>7X5</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8A9</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ANIOZ</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRAZJ</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120322</creationdate><title>Sub S Valuation: To Tax Effect, or Not to Tax Effect, Is Not Really the Question</title><author>TINKELMAN, DANIEL ; VISWANATH, P.V. ; VOGEL, GLEN M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g1553-fd196bf19b60d2acca8435bb24bfd7f646ea9079b641101fbe486a4f9bc9fdcb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Basis (Taxation)</topic><topic>Breach of contract</topic><topic>Business structures</topic><topic>Business valuation</topic><topic>C corporations</topic><topic>Corporate income taxes</topic><topic>Corporate taxes</topic><topic>Corporations</topic><topic>Discounts</topic><topic>Dividends</topic><topic>Expert witness testimony</topic><topic>Fair market value</topic><topic>Fair value</topic><topic>Federal court decisions</topic><topic>Income tax returns</topic><topic>Income taxes</topic><topic>Laws, regulations and rules</topic><topic>S corporation</topic><topic>S corporations</topic><topic>Shareholders</topic><topic>State court decisions</topic><topic>Stockholders</topic><topic>Tax court decisions</topic><topic>Tax courts</topic><topic>Tax rates</topic><topic>Tax returns</topic><topic>Taxation</topic><topic>Taxes</topic><topic>Valuation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>TINKELMAN, DANIEL</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VISWANATH, P.V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VOGEL, GLEN M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale OneFile: LegalTrac</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Accounting & Tax Database</collection><collection>Entrepreneurship Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Accounting & Tax Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Accounting, Tax & Banking Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Accounting, Tax & Banking Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>The Tax lawyer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>TINKELMAN, DANIEL</au><au>VISWANATH, P.V.</au><au>VOGEL, GLEN M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sub S Valuation: To Tax Effect, or Not to Tax Effect, Is Not Really the Question</atitle><jtitle>The Tax lawyer</jtitle><date>2012-03-22</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>65</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>555</spage><epage>589</epage><pages>555-589</pages><issn>0040-005X</issn><eissn>2329-6089</eissn><abstract>The valuation of Subchapter S corporations is an important tax related issue for small corporations. For the 2008 tax year, Service data indicates that approximately 4 million Subchapter S corporations, with almost 7 million shareholders and total receipts of over $6.1 trillion, filed tax returns. This represents approximately 69% of the nearly 5.85 million tax returns filed by all corporations. Every year, some Subchapter S shareholders die, some get divorced, and some have disputes with other shareholders. After any of these events, valuation of S corporation shares is necessary to determine estate and gift taxes, divorce settlements, and equitable division of corporate ownership interests, as well as for a variety of other purposes. In Gross v. Commissioner, the Tax Court agreed with the testimony of an expert testifying for the Service regarding the valuation of an estate as of 1992. Here, the expert testified that tax effecting at normal corporate rates was inappropriate.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Section of Taxation, American Bar Association</pub><tpages>35</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0040-005X |
| ispartof | The Tax lawyer, 2012-03, Vol.65 (3), p.555-589 |
| issn | 0040-005X 2329-6089 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1355014423 |
| source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; Jstor Complete Legacy |
| subjects | Basis (Taxation) Breach of contract Business structures Business valuation C corporations Corporate income taxes Corporate taxes Corporations Discounts Dividends Expert witness testimony Fair market value Fair value Federal court decisions Income tax returns Income taxes Laws, regulations and rules S corporation S corporations Shareholders State court decisions Stockholders Tax court decisions Tax courts Tax rates Tax returns Taxation Taxes Valuation |
| title | Sub S Valuation: To Tax Effect, or Not to Tax Effect, Is Not Really the Question |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T10%3A18%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sub%20S%20Valuation:%20To%20Tax%20Effect,%20or%20Not%20to%20Tax%20Effect,%20Is%20Not%20Really%20the%20Question&rft.jtitle=The%20Tax%20lawyer&rft.au=TINKELMAN,%20DANIEL&rft.date=2012-03-22&rft.volume=65&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=555&rft.epage=589&rft.pages=555-589&rft.issn=0040-005X&rft.eissn=2329-6089&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA306972081%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1355014423&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A306972081&rft_jstor_id=41639203&rfr_iscdi=true |