§155

are distinguishable from the instant case in that petitioners, unlike the taxpayers in those cases, did not provide to respondent the information required in the regulations at any time. See Bond v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. at 34-35, 42; Consol. Investors Grp. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C.M. (CCH) at 614. By curing the defects in their appraisals at the audit stage, the taxpayers in Bond and Consol. Investors Grp. complied with the principal objective ofDEFRA sec. 155 though they did not meetthe litera

Because we shall grant respondent's motion for partial summary judgment, we need not decide whether the sale of development rights to DALPF constitutes a qualified conservation contribution.

Accordingly, we hold that New Shoals substantially complied with the reporting requirements for a qualified appraisal.

1998), we reviewed the history of TRA section 155 and stated: [I]t is clear that the principal objective of * * * [TRA] section 155 was to provide a mechanism whereby respondent would obtain sufficient return information in support of the claimed valuation of charitable contributions of property to enable respondent to deal more effectively with the prevalent use of overvaluations.

DEFRA section 155 instructs the Secretary to provide heightened substantiation reporting requirements for certain noncash charitable contributions . DEFRA section 155 provides : (3) Appraisal summary .--For purposes of this subsection, the appraisal summary shall be in such form and include such information as the Secretary prescribes by regulations . Su

DEFRA section 155 instructs the Secretary to provide heightened substantiation reporting requirements for certain noncash charitable contributions . DEFRA section 155 provides : (3) Appraisal summary .--For purposes of this subsection, the appraisal summary shall be in such form and include such information as the Secretary prescribes by regulations . Su

DEFRA section 155 instructs the Secretary to provide heightened substantiation reporting requirements for certain noncash charitable contributions . DEFRA section 155 provides : (3) Appraisal summary .--For purposes of this subsection, the appraisal summary shall be in such form and include such information as the Secretary prescribes by regulations . Su

DEFRA section 155 instructs the Secretary to provide heightened substantiation reporting requirements for certain noncash charitable contributions . DEFRA section 155 provides : (3) Appraisal summary .--For purposes of this subsection, the appraisal summary shall be in such form and include such information as the Secretary prescribes by regulations . Su

DEFRA section 155 instructs the Secretary to provide heightened substantiation reporting requirements for certain noncash charitable contributions . DEFRA section 155 provides : (3) Appraisal summary .--For purposes of this subsection, the appraisal summary shall be in such form and include such information as the Secretary prescribes by regulations . Su

New York Penal Code § 155.05 (West 2023) provides that “[a] person steals property and commits larceny when, with intent to deprive another of property or to appropriate the same to himself or to a third person, he wrongfully takes, obtains or withholds such property from an owner thereof.” This definition of larceny includes embezzlement, obtaining property by false

ontents to the other party. See Woods v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 776 (1989) (equitably reforming a 19 [*19] Form 872–A, Special Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax, to correct a drafting error made by the IRS); Restatement (Second) of Contracts §§ 155, 166 (Am. L. Inst. 1981).27 IQH alleges that it informed its certified public accountant (CPA) of its intention to waive the carryback period each year between 2010 and 2013 but that the CPA mistakenly failed to check the box on line 11 of each

§ 155.410(e)(2) (2015), and as of that date, the most recently published poverty guidelines were published in the 5 [*5] Federal Register on January 22, 2015, see 80 Fed. Reg. 3236 (Jan. 22, 2015). If a taxpayer is unable to afford the monthly premiums for his or her health coverage, Treasury may reduce the monthly premium amount by remitting APTC

A summary of the requirements Section 170(f)(11) imposes, for charitable contribution deductions, heightened substantiation requirements on taxpayers, depending on the value of the contribution.27 Section 170(f)(11)(A)(i) provides that for 26 If SCT were to fail to enforce the terms of the easement deed, then “the Attorney General or the district attorney of the circuit in which the major portion of trust property lies shall represent the interests of the beneficiaries and the interests of this

Section 170(f)(11)(G) provides that, in the case of a partnership or S corporation, the qualified appraisal requirements “shall be applied at the entity level.” We must therefore determine whether Integra met those requirements for its purported contribution of ABC units.

98-369, § 155(a)(1)(B), 98 Stat. 494, 691; see Costello v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2015-87, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1441, 7 [*7] 1445; Jorgenson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-38, 79 T.C.M. (CCH) 1444, 1450 (noting that the IRS has prescribed Form 8283 to be used as the “appraisal summary”); Treas. Reg. § 1.170A-13(c)(2). Where a contribution of property is v

Petitioners’ PTC and APTC arguments hinge on this Court’s allowing a deduction of their total $123,822 capital loss, which we held above was limited to $3,000. See supra pp. 4–8. Because section 1211(b) reduces petitioners’ capital loss to $3,000, we must evaluate whether petitioners’ modified AGI increased beyond the level of eligibili

494, 691–92. In relevant part the statute requires anyone claiming a deduction under section 170 for a contribution of property valued at more than $5,000 to attach an appraisal summary and include certain information, including the cost basis and acquisition date of the contributed property, to the return on which the deduction

- 20 - [*20] property worth more than $5,000 to “obtain a qualified appraisal for the property contributed.” DEFRA section 155 defined “qualified appraisal” to include any “additional information as the Secretary prescribes in such regulations.” Id.

- 20 - [*20] property worth more than $5,000 to “obtain a qualified appraisal for the property contributed.” DEFRA section 155 defined “qualified appraisal” to include any “additional information as the Secretary prescribes in such regulations.” Id.

155.410(e)(2) (2016). As of November 1, 2016, the most recently published poverty guidelines had been published in the Federal Register on January 25, 2016. Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines, 81 Fed. Reg. 4036 (Jan. 25, 2016). - 11 - This case turns on whether Ms. Heston improperly failed to include all of her Social Security benefi

155.410(e)(1) (2017). As of November 15, 2014, the most recently published poverty guidelines were published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2014. See Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines, 79 Fed. Reg. 3593 (Jan. 22, 2014). The PTC is based upon a number of factors, including the taxpayer’s family size and household income. House

155.410(e)(1) (2014). As ofNovember 15, 2014, the most recently published poverty guidelines had been published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2014. Annual Update ofthe HHS Poverty Guidelines, 79 Fed. Reg. 3593 (Jan. 22, 2014). According to those guidelines, the applicable FPL for a family oftwo in California during 2015 was $15,730. I

require." Sec. 170(f)(11)(c). The required information includes "an appraisal summary" that must be attached "to the return on which such deduction is first claimed for such contribution." Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155(a)(1), 98 Stat. at 691; see sec. 1.170A-13(c)(2), Income Tax Regs. The IRS has prescribed Form 8283 to be used as the "appraisal summary." Jorgenson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-38, 79 T.C.M. (CCH) 1444, 1450. Failure to comply with this

require." Sec. 170(f)(11)(C). The required information includes "an appraisal summary" that must be attached "to the return on which such deduction is first claimed for such contribution." Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155(a)(1)(B), 98 Stat. at 691; see sec. 1.170A-13(c)(2), Income Tax Regs. The IRS has prescrib- ed Form 8283 to be used as the "appraisal summary." Jorgenson v. Commission- g, T.C. Memo. 2000-38, 79 T.C.M. (CCH) 1444, 1450. Failure to comply with

require." Sec. 170(f)(11)(C). The required information includes "an appraisal summary" that must be attached "to the return on which such deduction is first claimed for such contribution." Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155(a)(1)(B), 98 Stat. at 691; see sec. 1.170A-13(c)(2), Income Tax Regs. The IRS has pre- scribed Form 8283 to be used as the "appraisal summary." Jorgenson v. Commis- sioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-38, 79 T.C.M. (CCH) 1444, 1450. Failure to comply wit

require." Sec. 170(f)(11)(C). The required information includes "an appraisal summary" that must be attached "to the return on which such deduction is first claimed for such contribution." Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155(a)(1)(B), 98 Stat. at 691; see sec. 1.170A-13(c)(2), Income Tax Regs. The IRS has pre- scribed Form 8283 to be used as the "appraisal summary." Jorgenson v. Commis- sioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-38, 79 T.C.M. (CCH) 1444, 1450. Failure to comply wit

Because we find no genuine dispute as to any material fact, and because we find that petitioners neither strictly nor substantially complied with the requirements ofsection 155 ofthe Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub.

Second, even ifCongress were thought to have intended "appraisal sum- mary" and "return" to be mutually exclusive terms, there is nothing in DEFRA section 155 that prohibits the Secretary from requiring that information concerning cost basis and acquisition date be included b_ on the appraisal summaryM elsewhere on the return.

require." Sec. 170(f)(11)(C). The required information includes "an appraisal summary" that must be attached "to the return on which such deduction is first claimed for such contribution." Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155(a)(1)(B), 98 Stat. at 691; see sec. 1.170A-13(c)(2), Income Tax Regs. The IRS has pre- scribed Form 8283 to be used as the "appraisal summary." Jorgenson v. Commis- sioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-38, 79 T.C.M. (CCH) 1444, 1450. Failure to comply wit

155.410(b) (2013). At that time the FPL for a two- - 6 - [*6] person household in California was $15,510. See 78 Fed. Reg. 5182, 5183 (Jan. 24, 2013). Multiplying that figure by 400% yields an income limit of $62,040. Under section 36B "household income" equals the sum ofthe taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) and the MAGI ofcert

155.410(e)(1) (2018). Accordingly, for purposes ofthis case, we look to the Federal poverty guidelines in effect during 2014. The guidelines indicate that the applicable FPL for a household ofone person, for the 48 contiguous States and the District ofColumbia, was $11,670. 79 Fed. Reg. 3593 (Jan. 22, 2014). -6- (B) An Exchange estimates at t

en that a theft occurred under the law ofthe rele- vantjurisdiction.2 They contend that, under New York law, Mr. Kristie perpe- trated a theft by false pretenses when he encouraged petitioner to invest in an apparent Ponzi scheme. See N.Y. Penal Law sec. 155.05 (McKinney 2018); People v. Luongo, 391 N.E.2d 1341, 1345-46 (N.Y. 1979) (finding that a promoter ofa Ponzi scheme was guilty oflarceny by false promise). But petitioner's "overseas investment" had an alleged nexus with England as well as

he amount ofa contribution ofproperty other than money is generally measured by the property's fair market value at the time ofthe contribution. Sec. 1.170A-1(c)(1), Income Tax Regs. In the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155(a)(1) and (2), 98 Stat. at 691, Congress directed the Secretary to prescribe regulations under section 170(a)(1) requiring donors to meet heightened substantiation requirements to support deductions claimed for charitable contributions. Congr

at 691, provides certain rules for substantiating charitable contributions and orders the Secretary to prescribe regulations that require a taxpayerwho claims a deduction for the donation of 9 We believe this means an appeal would go to the Ninth Circuit. Sec. 7482(b)(1)(E). - 17 - property worth more than $5,000 to "obtain a qu

ies agreed to and.prevents an unintended and unexpected windfall. EL at 789. However, to reform Form 872, there must be "clear and convincing evidence" as to the parties' intent. See id. at - 10 - [*10] 789 n.14 (citing 1 Restatement, Contracts 2d, sec. 155, comment c). Ifan ambiguity exists in Form 872, the Court may consider extrinsic evidence to clarify the ambiguity and to determine the parties' intent. See id. at 780. Form 872, the agreement to extend the period oflimitation between the Com

ies agreed to and.prevents an unintended and unexpected windfall. EL at 789. However, to reform Form 872, there must be "clear and convincing evidence" as to the parties' intent. See id. at - 10 - [*10] 789 n.14 (citing 1 Restatement, Contracts 2d, sec. 155, comment c). Ifan ambiguity exists in Form 872, the Court may consider extrinsic evidence to clarify the ambiguity and to determine the parties' intent. See id. at 780. Form 872, the agreement to extend the period oflimitation between the Com

ies agreed to and.prevents an unintended and unexpected windfall. EL at 789. However, to reform Form 872, there must be "clear and convincing evidence" as to the parties' intent. See id. at - 10 - [*10] 789 n.14 (citing 1 Restatement, Contracts 2d, sec. 155, comment c). Ifan ambiguity exists in Form 872, the Court may consider extrinsic evidence to clarify the ambiguity and to determine the parties' intent. See id. at 780. Form 872, the agreement to extend the period oflimitation between the Com

ppraisal summary (i.e., Form 8283), and (3) maintain records containing the information required in section 1.170A-13(b)(2)(ii), Income Tax Regs. Another relevant statutory provision is the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155, 98 Stat. at 691, through which Congress directed the Secretaryto prescribe regulations requiring any individual, closely held corporation, or personal services corporation claiming a charitable contribution deduction for which the claimed va

ppraisal summary (i.e., Form 8283), and (3) maintain records containing the information required in section 1.170A-13(b)(2)(ii), Income Tax Regs. Another relevant statutory provision is the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (DEFRA), Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155, 98 Stat. at 691, through which Congress directed the Secretaryto prescribe regulations requiring any individual, closely held corporation, or personal services corporation claiming a charitable contribution deduction for which the claimed va

.M. (CCH) 604, 605 n.2 (2010). Accordingly, the Court has jurisdictionto address BSA's taxes as part ofpetitioners' shareholder-level proceeding. See Winter v. Commissioner, 135 T.C. 238, 245-246 (2010). - 18 - [*18] The principal objective ofDEFRA sec. 155 was to provide a mechanism wherebythe IRS would obtain sufficient information in support ofa claimed valuation ofa charitable contribution ofpropertyto enable the IRS to deal more effectivelywith the prevalentuse ofovervaluations. See id. at

155(a), 98 Stat. at 691. - 69 - [*69] The Court ofAppeals stated: "The procedural regulations requiring an appraisal report and summary are designed to provide information 'sufficientto permit [the IRS] to evaluate the [taxpayer]'sreported contribution and monitor and address concerns about overvaluation.'" Kaufman v. Shulman, 687 F.3d at 29

at 691, ordered the Secretary to prescribe regulations under section 170(a)(1) requiring a taxpayer claiming a deduction for a contribution of propertyworth more than $5,000 to "obtain [and retain] a qualified appraisal for the property contributed", attach an "appraisal summary" to the return reporting - 51 - the deduction, and

at 691--which provided rules for substantiating charitable contributions--orderedthe Secretaryto prescribe regulations under section 170(a)(1) that would require a taxpayer claiming a deduction for the donation ofproperty worth more than $5,000 to "obtain a qualified appraisal for the property contributed." DEFRA section 155 defi

at 691. Third, citing a highest and best use ofconservation, he maintains the subject property's fair market value was $660,000 on the contribution date. Along that line, respondent argues that insofar as the value ofthe subject property did not exceed the consideration the preservation partnership paid, no deduction is allowed u

at 441-442; see also Vaughn v.

itten acknowledgment from the donee organization (i.e., Boulder County) as required by section 170(f)(8)(A); (3) petitioner's -18- [*18] appraisal was not a "qualified appraisal" as required by the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98-369, sec. 155(a), 98 Stat. at 691, and by section 1.170A-13(c), Income Tax Regs.; and (4) the value ofthe easement as determined in petitioner's appraisal was overstated. Because we find that the conservation easement petitioner granted to Boulder County w

at 691. Third, citing a highest and best use ofconservation, he maintains the subject property's fair market value was $660,000 on the contribution date. Along that line, respondent argues that insofar as the value ofthe subject property did not exceed the consideration the preservation partnership paid, no deduction is allowed u

at 691. Third, citing a highest and best use ofconservation, he maintains the subject property's fair market value was $660,000 on the contribution date. Along that line, respondent argues that insofar as the value ofthe subject property did not exceed the consideration the preservation partnership paid, no deduction is allowed u

155(c)(1), 98 Stat. at 693. The court held that the qualified- appraisal and good-faith-investigationrequirements in sec. 6659(f)(2) (as added by DEFRA) were in addition to the reasonable basis and good faith requirements found in then sec. 6659(e): (continued...) - 77 - regulations clarify the relationship between the section 6664(c)(1) good

at 691, Congress invited the Secretaryto promulgate regulations that define the term "qualified appraisal" to include any additional information the Secretarymayrequire. As noted in Rothman v. Commissioner, slip op. at 12-13, the Secretarypromulgatedthe qualified appraisal regulation for the stated purpose ofconforming existing r

at 691. DEFRA section 155 commanded the Secretary to issue regulations under section 170(a)(1) to require taxpayers to get a qualified appraisal and attach an 8 We don't summarize the Commissioner's arguments about the validity of the regulations under Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984). That'

at 691. DEFRA section 155 commanded the Secretary to issue regulations under section 170(a)(1) to require taxpayers to get a qualified appraisal and attach an 8 We don't summarize the Commissioner's arguments about the validity of the regulations under Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984). That'

691. As we explained in Hewitt v. Commissioner, 109 T.C. 258, 265 (1997), affd. without published opinion 166 F.3d 332 (4th - 20 - Cir. 1998), the primary purpose of DEFRA section 155 was to "provide a mechanism whereby respondent would obtain sufficient return information in support of the claimed valuation of charitable contri

7 As professors Saltzburg, Martin, and Capra state: Expert witness testimony can be "reliable even though the expert's methodology is not generally accepted in her field." 3 Saltzburg et al., Federal Rules of Evidence Manual, sec. 702.02[5], at 702- 718 (9th ed. 2006). - 25 - EPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-103 (repo

The first section is TRA section 155, 98 Stat.

ioner, 92 T.C. 776, 789 (1989): The circumstances of this case do not warrant withholding relief from a mistake. The mere fact that the party seeking relief did not exercise reasonable care does not preclude reformation. 1 Restatement, Contracts 2d, sec. 155, comment a; sec. 157, p. 416. Reformation provides a result that both parties agreed to and prevents an unintended and unexpected windfall. * * * We now turn to the proper computation of interest, for purposes of determining whether or not p

A further applicable statutory provision is section 155 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (Division A of the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984), Pub.

ioner, 92 T.C. 776, 789 (1989): The circumstances of this case do not warrant withholding relief from a mistake. The mere fact that the party seeking relief did not exercise reasonable care does not preclude reformation. 1 Restatement, Contracts 2d, sec. 155, comment a; sec. 157, p. 416. Reformation provides a result that both parties agreed to and prevents an unintended and unexpected windfall. * * * We now turn to the proper computation of interest, for purposes of determining whether or not p

DEFRA section 155, in its final form, adopted an approach which did not amend section 170 but provided separate rules for such substantiation. It incorporated many of the provisions of the Senate version but left the details of implementation to regulations to be issued by the Secretary. The provisions relevant to this case state: [DEFRA] SEC. 155. Subst