Contents

SPECIAL GIFT SITUATIONSpublic by the contribution of an easement is determined with reference to theamount of access permitted by the terms of the easement established by thedonor, rather than the amount of access actually provided by the donee charitableorganization. 174(d) Exclusivity RequirementTo satisfy these rules, a contribution must be exclusively for conservation purposes.A conservation deduction will not be denied, however, when an incidentalbenefit inures to the donor merely as a result of conservation restrictionslimiting the uses to which the donor’s property may be put. 175 In general, a conservationdeduction will not be allowed if the contribution would accomplishone of the enumerated conservation purposes but would also permit destructionof other significant conservation interests. 176 Nonetheless, a use that is destructiveof conservation interests will be permitted if the use is necessary for protectionof the conservation interests that are the subject of the contribution. 177A contribution cannot be treated as being exclusively for conservation purposesunless the conservation purpose is protected in perpetuity. 178 Thus, anyinterest in the property retained by the donor (and the donor’s successors ininterest) must be subject to legally enforceable restrictions that will prevent usesof the retained interest that are inconsistent with the conservation purposes ofthe donation. 179 A deduction is not permitted under these rules for a contributionof an interest in property that is subject to a mortgage, unless the mortgageesubordinates its rights in the property to the right of the charitable organizationto enforce the conservation purposes of the gift in perpetuity. 180 A conservationdeduction will not be disallowed, however, merely because the interest thatpasses to, or is vested in, the donee charitable organization may be defeated bythe performance of some act or the happening of some event, if on the date of thegift it appears that the possibility that the act or event will occur is so remote asto be negligible. 181In general, if the contribution is of any interest as to which a qualified mineralinterest is retained, this requirement of exclusivity is not regarded as met if at anytime there may be extraction or removal of minerals by any surface miningmethod. 182 Also, the requirement that the conservation purposes be protected in174 Reg. § 1.170A-14(d)(5)(iv)(C).175 Reg. § 1.170A-14(e)(1).176 Reg. § 1.170A-14(e)(2).177 Reg. § 1.170A-14(e)(3).178 IRC § 170(h)(5)(A); Reg. § 1.170A-14(a).179 Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(1).180 Reg. § 1.170A- 14(g)(2).181 Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(3). A court held that a grant of an easement over the facades of the condominium apartmentbuilding in which the donors owned interests was not a qualified conservation contribution, because itwas not contributed exclusively for conservation purposes. The easement was not protected in perpetuity becausea security interest in the building had priority over the easement. Satullo v. Commissioner, 66 T.C.M.(CCH) 1697 (1994).182 IRC § 170(h)(5)(B)(i). The law allows a charitable contribution deduction (for income or estate tax purposes)to persons making a contribution of a permanent conservation easement on property when a mineral interesthas been retained and surface mining is possible, but the probability of exercise of the rights retained is so remoteas to be negligible. IRC § 170(h)(5)(B)(ii). 290