As a service to our clients and colleagues, Brueggeman and Johnson Yeanoplos, P.C. offers the FCG Estate and Gift E-Flash e-mail estate update service and Litigation & Valuation Report newsletter. Below, you will find decriptions of the most recent editions as well as links to their electronic versions.
If you would like to subscribe, send an email to us at email@example.com. Include your name, the name of your business, your complete mailing address, your active e-mail address, and your practice area. Tell us which newsletter or service you would like to receive, and you will begin receiving your subcription(s) with the next edition, free of charge.
FCG Estate and Gift E-Flash
If you specialize in estate planning, subscribe to our FCG Estate and Gift E-Flash estate update service. As decisions are handed down, Brueggeman and Johnson Yeanoplos, P.C. will e-mail you the details.
The most recent E-Flash citation and summary are below.
JOANNE M. WANDRY, DONOR, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent, ALBERT D. WANDRY, a.k.a. A. DEAN WANDRY, DONOR, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent T.C. Memo. 2012-88, Docket Nos. 10751-09, 10808-09,Judge: Hon. Harry Allen Haines, Filing date March 26, 2012
In an important gift tax case involving transfers among family members, the Tax Court determined that transfers of closely-held business interests were specific dollar amount transfers rather than transfers of fixed percentage interests. Further, the court ruled that the Petitioners intent was not contrary to public policy and their transfer documents were not void for federal tax purposes. (Read More...)
Litigation & Valuation Report
The Litigation & Valuation Report provides you with timely articles about developments in the litigation and valuation industry. Full-color print issues are mailed to subscribers six times a year. Click on the image to the right for an electronic copy of the latest edition.
In the September/October 2012 issue, you will find:
How capital structure affects business valuation
A company’s capital structure — essentially, its blend of equity and debt financing — is a significant factor in valuing the business. But a question that often arises is whether the valuator should use the company’s actual capital structure or its anticipated future capital structure — or a prospective buyer’s capital structure or the company’s optimal capital structure. Which method is best depends on several factors. This article shows how valuators determine the right capital structure for valuation purposes.
Lucent v. Microsoft
Following the case of the shrinking damages
The decade-old patent infringement litigation in Lucent Technologies, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. illustrates, as the court itself observed, “the difficulty of properly valuing a small patented component, without a stand-alone market, within a larger program.” Lucent won “reasonable royalty” damages against Microsoft, but the award was reduced repeatedly until, in January 2012, the parties settled their dispute for an undisclosed sum. This article explains the court’s reasoning as it tried to determine damages regarding a product that contained both infringing and noninfringing components. A sidebar discusses application of the entire market value rule.
Lucent Technologies Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., Case No. 07-CV-2000 H (CAB) (S.D. Cal. Nov. 10, 2011)
Blockage discounts: They’re all about supply and demand
When valuing a business, an appraiser often establishes discounts for lack of control and marketability. In some instances it’s not a company but large blocks of public stock that must be valued. In such cases, the valuator is likely to employ a discount for blockage — especially if the stock has limited trading volume, for blockage discounts are based on the law of supply and demand. This article explains how appraisers determine blockage discounts.
6 common procurement fraud schemes
The terms “procurement fraud” and “vendor fraud” are often used interchangeably. But procurement fraud encompasses a broad range of schemes, some of which don’t involve vendors. This article lists six common schemes and some red flags to look for.
Past Issues of Our Newsletters
- September/October 2012 Litigation & Valuation Report
- July/August 2012 Litigation & Valuation Report
- March/April 2012 Litigation & Valuation Report
- January/February 2012 Litigation & Valuation Report
- September/October 2011 Litigation & Valuation Report
- July/August 2011 Litigation & Valuation Report
- May/June 2011 Litigation & Valuation Report
- March/April 2011 Litigation & Valuation Report
- January/February 2011 Litigation & Valuation Report
Click here to view archived issues of our newsletters.
Past Issues of Our E-Flash
- March 26, 2012 E-Flash
- November 2, 2011 E-Flash
- August 9, 2011 E-Flash
- June 28, 2011 E-Flash
- June 22, 2011 E-Flash
- May 23, 2011 E-Flash
- April 12, 2011 E-Flash
- January 31, 2011 E-Flash
Click here to view archived issues of our E-Flash.
Past Issues of Our Building Value Newsletters