Based on Price and Fisher, it seems that ownership of an interest in a closely held entity is likely not “a presently reachable economic benefit” as required by the Tax Court in Hackl, especially if there are restrictions on sale of the interest. The court in Fisher stated that not even a right to “use” is sufficient. The courts seem to require a gift of cash or something readily convertible to cash to qualify for the annual exclusion.
All access premium subscription
Please Log in if you are currently a Trusts & Estates subscriber.
If you are interested in becoming a subscriber with unlimited article access, please select Subscription Options below.
Questions about your account or how to access content?
Contact: [email protected]
0 comments
Hide comments