(1) A minority discount did not apply in valuing marital property consisting of husband’s interest in an LLC in which he was minority owner, where the LLC was a family LLC (2) A lack-of marketability discount did not apply either, since the primary value of the LLC was in real estate and it was unlikely a sale would ever occur.
Discount of 25% for 15% ownership of a family business affirmed. Higher discount rejected, as no minority sale was planned.
Applying 40% discount to business in which each party had a 50% interest is reversed as husband had full control over corporate affairs.
No minority discount should be applied where the parties were sole shareholders and husband awarded 100% of the shares.
Court affirmed for not applying marketability discount where company was highly marketable due to high return.
Trial judge could not take judicial notice of discount of lack of marketability.
No minority discount where husband owned 50 percent interest in a family-owned business and his brother owned the other 50 percent.
No minority or marketability discount where partnership agreement means that minority shares would never have to be sold on the open market.
Trial court erred in using C-Corp tax rates for an S-Corporation. Also, the trial court erred in using “key man” and marketability discounts where the businesses (supermarkets) were not going to be sold.
Trial court reversed for discounting corporation for lack of control where son and father each owned one-half.