Page 40 - Business Valuation for Estates & Gift Taxes

The merger and acquisitions method arrives at a value based on the principal that an owner of a signifi-
cant (or entire) interest in a company can be determined through the comparison of transactions between
companies with comparable businesses or business models. Of course, because transactions of this na-
ture require owners to have controlling interests, this must be factored into the valuation engagement
and adjusted accordingly if comparable features are not part of the ownership interest being valued.
When using transaction data, the valuation analyst must also consider if the transaction represents an ac-
quisition by a strategic buyer (adding a premium on top of a controlling interest value that may need ad-
justment to more closely reflect fair market value; see exhibit 1). This is an assessment based on facts
and circumstances.

In contrast, the guideline public company method presumes a minority interest. This assumption is built
on the fact that public company multiples are based on the pricing of minority interests traded on the
public markets. Over time, practitioners have increasingly come to accept that the use of public multi-
ples is no different than the use of a cost of equity based on observations from the public markets. For
example, if the valuation analyst determines that a 20 percent cost of equity is correct, he or she would
use that cost of equity to value either a minority interest or a controlling interest. The difference in the
two valuations would be the benefit stream to which the cost of equity is applied. Because the multiples
observed in the public markets come from the same data that provide the equity rates of return, the same
could be said of the use of those multiples. The level of value conclusion is based on the benefit stream
rather than the fact that the multiple comes from minority interests.

Other Factors to Consider

Possessing control of a company does not necessarily give the control owner the right to take actions at
the expense of other owners. The controlling owner may have a fiduciary duty to the other owners that
requires the company be managed to benefit all owners equally. For example, in cases where the con-
trolling owner is clearly receiving value at the expense of the non-controlling owners, the non-
controlling owners could take legal action to regain their share. In many states, minority owners can sue
to dissolve the corporation.

Before considering applying a control premium or a discount for lack of control, the valuation analyst
must always be certain where in the levels of value chart the current conclusion sits. An engagement
may include several valuation methods which yield conclusions at different levels of value. A discount
or premium suitable to one method may not be suitable to all.

Empirical Data

Regardless of the approach used for the engagement, the valuation analyst will most likely need to refer
to external resources to assist in quantifying control premium and discount adjustments. There are sev-
eral well-established services that provide current information on valuation adjustments; however, the
valuation analyst must understand the differences between the resources and how best to adjust the valu-
ation report accordingly.

Two of the more common sources of control premium data include Factset Mergerstat Review and
Factset Mergerstat/BVR Control Premium Study.

Factset Mergerstat Review is a print book that is published annually and focuses on aggregate averages
and trends. Factset Mergerstat Review includes online access to the Factset Mergerstat Review Monthly
Review, which provides information on the latest M&A deals, news, and trends.

Page 38 ©2015, AICPA