Home      Login

Abstract: 

Pool was a “bad facts” case that highlighted several aspects of a Bramblett transaction that can compromise the long-term capital gain treatment of the related-party conveyance. Poor planning led to an unfortunate outcome for the taxpayer, but practitioners can avoid a similar fate for their clients. The author examines the basics of a “good” Bramblett transaction, explains how the taxpayers in Pool went awry, and suggests three critical rules to follow in order to avoid similar problems in the future.

Keywords: Bramblett transaction; capital gain preservation transaction; Pool v. Commissioner; real estate development; property held for investment; ordinary property used in a trade or business

Affiliations:  1: L’Abbate, Balkan, Colavita & Contini, L.L.P..