Court Opinion

ID: 9521379
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:03:43.303857+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:42.291891
License: Public Domain

RILEY, Chief Judge,
concurring.
I find myself in fundamental agreement with both of my colleagues in this complex ease. As emphasized by Judge Wollman (and comprehensively explained in Judge Holmes’ dissenting Tax Court opinion), the partnership-level determination that Randall Thompson’s outside basis was overstated still requires partner-level computation and legal analysis to determine Thompson’s correct tax liability. And the ambiguous partnership-level determination leaves it unclear whether (1) Thompson’s basis was overstated by $22,006,759 or (2) his purported basis of $22,006,759 was overstated by an amount to be determined, as it should, at the partner level. Therefore, I fully concur in Judge Wollman’s opinion for the court. Yet I also agree with Judge Gruender’s alternate basis for reversing the Tax Court’s decision, as explained in the fourth paragraph of his concurrence.