## Facts

- Charles A. Weil and Joan S. Weil donated a Frederick Ede oil painting to the University of Maine in 1960.
- On their 1960 joint federal income tax return, they claimed a $1,500 charitable-contribution deduction, asserting that amount as the painting’s fair market value at the time of the gift.
- The claimed value relied on an appraisal by Herbert Chase, who examined the painting in the Weils’ home and knew the appraisal was for a charitable-deduction claim.
- The Commissioner determined the painting’s fair market value was $900 under Treas. Reg. § 1.170-1(c)(1) and disallowed $600 of the deduction, issuing a notice of deficiency.
- In the Tax Court deficiency proceeding, the Weils bore the burden to prove a value higher than the Commissioner’s determination.
- At trial, Chase testified as the Weils’ valuation witness but could not describe basic features of the painting (including subject matter, color, shape, or how it was created).
- Chase also admitted limited knowledge of the artist and the market for the artist’s work, including no awareness of gallery representation or any actual sales of Ede works.
- The Weils offered no comparable-sales evidence or other objective market data supporting the $1,500 valuation.

## Issues

1. Whether the Weils proved that the donated painting’s fair market value at the time of the 1960 contribution was $1,500 rather than $900 for purposes of the § 170 charitable-contribution deduction.
2. What weight should be given to the taxpayers’ expert appraisal testimony where the appraiser lacks familiarity with the work, the artist, and relevant market data.

## Decision

- The Tax Court sustained the Commissioner’s $900 fair market value determination.
- The court held the Weils failed to carry their burden of proving the painting’s value exceeded $900.
- The court gave little weight to Chase’s appraisal testimony because it lacked a sufficient factual and market foundation.
- The $600 disallowance of the claimed charitable-contribution deduction was upheld, and judgment was entered for the Commissioner.

## Legal Principles

- For a noncash charitable contribution, the deduction is generally limited to the property’s fair market value at the time of the contribution. Treas. Reg. § 1.170-1(c)(1).
- In a Tax Court deficiency case, the Commissioner’s determination is presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving it erroneous, including as to valuation.
- The court may discount or reject expert valuation opinion when the testimony is inadequately supported by knowledge of the property, the relevant market, or objective evidence such as comparable sales.

## Conclusion

Because the taxpayers’ appraisal was not supported by meaningful knowledge of the painting, the artist, or market transactions, and no objective market evidence was offered, the Tax Court upheld the IRS’s $900 valuation and disallowed $600 of the claimed § 170 deduction.


Weil v. Comm’r, 26 T.C.M. (CCH) 388 (T.C. 1967)