Comments for Preservation Law Digest

Comment on Bronowiski Mulligan Irrevocable Trust v Bridges by Shantia Anderheggen

Shantia Anderheggen — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 17:54:41 +0000

This one is interesting, Jonathan. Thanks for posting.

Comment on Carpenter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue by Not complying with specific Treas. Reg. never negligible | Preservation Law Digest

Mon, 09 Apr 2012 01:01:03 +0000

[...] 294 (2011) (Kaufman II) (the proceeds requirement of Treas. Regs. section 1.170A-14(g)(6)(ii)) and Carpenter v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2012-1 (the extinguishment by judicial proceeding requirement of Treas. Regs. section [...]

Comment on KOWALCHIK v. BROHL by Conservation tax credit transferee liable but not necessary party | Preservation Law Digest

Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:19:30 +0000

[...] The Court wrote: “In this dispute involving conservation easement (CE) tax credits, this [same Court] granted the petition of defendant, Barbara Brohl, the Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Revenue (DOR), for interlocutory review of the trial court’s orders in favor of plaintiffs, holding that persons who purchased CE tax credits (transferees) from plaintiffs: are not within the statutory definition of “taxpayer” under section 39-22-522(1), C.R.S. 2011; have no tax liability for deficiencies, interest, and penalties for the improper claim of a tax credit; need not be joined as necessary parties to this action under C.R.C.P. 19(a); and may be given notice of this proceeding by mail rather than being personally served under C.R.C.P. 4. Kowalchik v. Brohl, 2012 COA 25, ¶ 1 (Brohl I). [...]

Comment on Long Green Valley Ass’n v Bellevale Farms, Inc. Revised by Ag preservation easement not charitable trust in Maryland | Preservation Law Digest

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 02:09:45 +0000

[...] Long Green Valley Ass’n v Bellevale Farms, Inc. The Court’s opinion in this case was revised on February 14, 2012. A revised Digest post discussing the decision is available here. [...]

Comment on Miller v. City of Annapolis Historic Preservation Commission by MD Appeals Court Upholds Decision of Historic District Commission that Reconstruction to Match Original Porch was a Rehabilitation and not a New Construction « LAW OF THE LAND

Fri, 23 Sep 2011 05:04:42 +0000

[...] also, the Preservation Law Digest at: http://preservationlawdigest.com/2011/09/12/miller-v-city-of-annapolis-historic-preservation-commiss… Share this:StumbleUponDiggRedditTwitterFacebookEmailPrintLike this:LikeBe the first to like this [...]

Comment on 1982 East, LLC v Commissioner of Internal Revenue (aka Asser v Commissioner) by Court Upholds Flexibility in Conservation Easements | Preservation Law Digest

Mon, 27 Jun 2011 00:41:47 +0000

[...] forbids something that is already forbidden by state or local law is not really of any value. See 1982 East, LLC v Commissioner of Internal Revenue (aka Asser v Commissioner), US Tax Court, T.C. [...]

Comment on TEMPEL v COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE by Colorado Easement Tax Credit is Capital Asset | Preservation Law Digest

Colorado Easement Tax Credit is Capital Asset | Preservation Law Digest — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:14:12 +0000

[...] OF INTERNAL REVENUE US Tax Court, T.C. Memo. 2011-109, May 23, 2011: Follows the holding in Tempel v. Commissioner (US Tax Court, 136 T.C. No. 15, April 5, 2011), that Colorado State conservation easement tax credits are capital assets that qualify for capital [...]

Comment on Kaufman v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Reconsideration by No Easement Tax Deduction in Protected Historic District | Preservation Law Digest

Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:44:36 +0000

[...] all casualty insurance proceeds and all proceeds of condemnation. The Court, citing Kaufman I and Kaufman II, found this reservation of priority means the donation fails to meet the perpetuity requirement of [...]