United States: Massachusetts Society Of CPAs Publishes "Beware Of IRS Scrutiny Of Non-Cash Charitable Contributions"

Last Updated: March 8 2018
Article by Jon Barooshian and Matthew A. Morris

Taxpayers interested in making non-cash charitable gifts to public charities need to be aware of a recent IRS trend developing in Nantucket. A case set for trial on the February 2018 trial list at the Boston session of the United States Tax Court highlights the need for clarity in the law and regulations surrounding charitable gifts.

Petitioners claimed a deduction for a non-cash charitable gift they made to a local public charity known as Housing Nantucket. In short, Petitioners purchased a home in Nantucket that they planned to raze and rebuild. There was also a carriage house on their property that they wanted to replace with a new structure.

In order to benefit the extremely limited Nantucket housing market, Petitioners chose to donate the carriage house to Housing Nantucket rather than attempt to sell it at a significant profit. As Nantucket gained an international reputation as a tourist and summer destination for wealthy individuals, real estate prices skyrocketed pushing housing costs out of reach of many local and year-round residents. Those working in the service and trade industries as well as local government employees and others necessary for a functioning community could no longer afford to live on Nantucket. Since the island is located approximately 25 miles off the coast of Cape Cod, commuting to Nantucket is not a feasible alternative to living there. Created as a non-profit public charity in 1994 and recognized as a IRC §170 public charity, Housing Nantucket's mission is to create affordable housing opportunities for those who would otherwise be displaced.

Among the methods Housing Nantucket employs to achieve its mission is to accept donations of relocatable structures that are moved to locations it controls and then leased to those who fit within their mission. Housing Nantucket also occasionally accepts donations of relocatable structures, such as taxpayer's carriage house, and sells them to local qualifying residents who may have land available to them if relocating those structures to land controlled by Housing Nantucket is not feasible.

Housing Nantucket determined that Petitioners' carriage house was not suitable for relocation to land it controlled but was ultimately able to find a "buyer" who fit within its charitable mission. So, in essence, there were two separate transactions: 1) the Petitioner's donation of the carriage house to Housing Nantucket, and 2) Housing Nantucket's "sale" of the home to the Buyer. It is important to note that Housing Nantucket does not appraise properties, is not a real estate broker, and does not regularly buy and sell relocatable structures in their normal course of business. The "purchase price" therefore was based on a determination of what the buyer (a local tradesperson) was willing to pay rather than some objective determination of value.

When Petitioners filed their return, they claimed a charitable deduction equal in amount to the value determined their appraisal which, coincidentally, was approximately ten times more than Housing Nantucket's "sale" price of the carriage house to the local tradesperson. Appraisers generally use one of three methods to determine market value: 1) the sales comparison approach; 2) the cost approach; or 3) the income capitalization approach. In this case, the appraiser chose the cost approach to establish value and determined that the other two were not suitable proxies for value.

Although a sales approach is often the preferred method of determining value, the appraiser determined that there was not a sufficient amount of data of similar properties that exchanged hands in arms-length transactions between willing buyers and willing sellers where all relevant facts are disclosed. Without enough data, the sales approach is not a meaningful proxy for value. The appraiser specifically declined to use the sales comparison approach because there "was not a competitive and open market for just improvements." 

Likewise, the appraiser determined that the income capitalization approach, which is generally described as an investor's approach to value involving a determination of the net present value of an income stream that would or could be achieved from the property, was also not a suitable proxy for value since that method generally understates the value of residential property.

By process of elimination, the appraiser used the cost approach. In short, he estimated the replacement cost of the carriage house (the structure only—not the land) by multiplying the square footage of the property by an estimated cost per square foot to build the property. From that figure, he subtracted the estimated cost to move the property and factored in depreciation.

In all likelihood, it was the IRS matching program that triggered an audit. IRS computers likely flagged the ten-fold discrepancy in value as reported by Taxpayer on their Form 8283 and Housing Nantucket's Form 8282 it filed recording the sale of the same property in two contemporaneous transactions.

At the audit, the Revenue Agent denied the charitable deduction in its entirety and assessed additional income in an amount equal to the purchase price by Housing Nantucket's buyer. The IRS's position was that Taxpayers were not entitled to a deduction for the donated property because the substance of the transaction was a disguised sale. The Revenue Agent relied on IRC §61, Revenue Ruling 78-197, Revenue Ruling 60-370, and the U.S. Tax Court case Rolfs v. Commissioner, 135 TC 24 (2012) (denying taxpayers a charitable deduction for the value of a house donated to a local volunteer fire department for purposes of burning the house to the ground for training purposes).

The Revenue Agent's alternative theory was that the Taxpayer's appraisal was not a qualified appraisal. In particular, the Revenue Agent determined that the appraiser relied on an improper method of valuation using the cost method rather than a sales comparison approach.

Finally, the auditor determined that a 40% IRC §6662(h) penalty was warranted apparently determining that there was no reasonable cause that would justify an understatement.

Petitioners trip to IRS Appeals proved equally fruitless. IRS's formal position was that Petitioners donation did not meet the definition of a charitable contribution pursuant to IRC §170(c) claiming Petitioners derived a benefit in the form of avoiding what they characterize as a long and difficult demolition approval process.

Alternatively, IRS Appeals determined that if the donation ultimately was to qualify as a charitable contribution, the amount of the donation was not properly reported. IRS Appeals stated position was that the cost approach did not reflect the "restrictions" on the sale, the limited market of potential buyers, the risks of moving the structure, and the relocation costs. Furthermore, IRS also inexplicably concluded that the sale price was in line with sales prices for other homes sold under similar conditions in Nantucket.

For settlement purposes, the Appeals Officer was willing to concede the position that the transaction was nothing more than a disguised sale and allow a charitable deduction in an amount equal to the purchase price the buyer paid to Housing Nantucket. The Appeals officer, however, refused to concede the penalty.

After all of the resistance that they encountered in the audit and Appeals processes, the taxpayers were ready for a long battle with IRS Office of Chief Counsel before the Tax Court. Surprisingly, however, it is the Office of Chief Counsel which first conceded that both parties faced significant risks of litigation. The taxpayers' most significant weakness was the fact that the only market for these movable structures was the sales transactions between Housing Nantucket and those in need of affordable housing. The Service's most significant weaknesses were the facts that (1) the taxpayers did not stand to gain anything from the donation other than a Schedule A deduction (as demolishing the carriage house would not have cost anything in addition to the cost of demolishing the main house), (2) the "sales price" between Housing Nantucket and those in need of affordable housing was not based on the fair market value of the structures, but rather on the individuals' ability to pay, and (3) no U.S. Tax Court judge wants to spend valuable time and government resources adjudicating what is essentially a valuation dispute between two professional appraisers.

In consideration of these risks of litigation, the IRS and the taxpayers agreed to split the difference between them almost exactly down the middle. The final settlement represented just over 50 percent of the originally-claimed value of the carriage house, which was just barely over the threshold required to avoid the non-waivable substantial gross valuation misstatement penalty equal to 40 percent of the additional tax due under Code section 6662(h). Both parties ended up making significant sacrifices in consideration of their mutual understanding that the risks of litigation are not easy to anticipate in what is essentially uncharted territory of federal tax law regarding charitable deductions.

Although practitioners might initially assume that the scope of this case is relatively narrow, this case indicates that the IRS is willing to take a very aggressive stance—from audit, to Appeals, and eventually to the U.S. Tax Court—in order to challenge charitable deductions that might appear at first blush to be overinflated. The takeaway for practitioners is to exercise extreme caution with respect to any charitable deduction that requires a professional appraisal. Does the appraiser's methodology seem reasonable? Does he or she explain why this particular methodology is preferable to other methodologies? Are there any U.S. Tax Court cases on the same or similar issues in which the IRS has ultimately prevailed? These are all questions that we should ask ourselves before advising our clients to sign a Form 8283: Noncash Charitable Contributions.

Originally published by MSCPA

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions