The cite is LTR199949037. Date: Sept 1, 1999

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

"bm30003700[at]aol.com" <bm30003700[at]aol.com> wrote:

- quote -

But that doesn't restrict her from claiming a stepped up
basis in both community property halves of the business.

- quote -

If that's when they married, I suppose they could argue that
the value on that date was separate property and only the
value over that was community. But that might not be the
legal status under state law, depending on other factors.

Stu

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

bm30003700[at]aol.com wrote:

- quote -

Could please post the "cite" for that ruling? Thanks.

MTW

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Looks like I was off on the issue, and the source of my
info. It was actually an Internal Revenue Service ruling
that addressed amortization of the goodwill, not step up,
per se.

IRS ruled that, where business was owned as community
property before 8/10/93, wife, in carrying on the business,
could only amortize one half of goodwill after husband
passed away leaving his one-half interest included in his
gross estate.

Guess IRS logic was that she only acquired the goodwill
attributable to her husband's one half interest after 1993.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->