Gabe W. Stewart, Jr., and Doris R. Stewart - Page 10

                                        - 9 -                                         
               The boat appraiser, a disinterested third party who provided           
          appraisals for The Salvation Army, inspected the boat and offered           
          a detail description of the boat’s condition.  After his                    
          inspection, the boat appraiser valued the boat at $500.   After             
          the appraisal, the boat was subsequently sold by The Salvation              
          Army for $500.                                                              
               The record does not establish that the value of the boat was           
          greater than $500 at the time contributed by petitioners to The             
          Salvation Army.  Accordingly, we hold that petitioners are not              
          entitled to a charitable deduction with respect to the boat in              
          excess of the amount allowed by respondent.                                 
               B.  Section 6662(a)5                                                   
               The last issue for decision is whether petitioners are                 
          liable for an accuracy-related penalty pursuant to section                  
          6662(a) for the year in issue.  Section 6662(a) and (b)(1)                  
          provides that if any portion of an underpayment of tax is                   
          attributable to negligence or disregard of rules or regulations,            
          then there shall be added to the tax an amount equal to 20                  
          percent of the amount of the underpayment that is so                        


               5  Respondent has satisfied his burden of production under             
          sec. 7491(c) with respect to the accuracy-related penalty under             
          sec. 6662(a) and (b)(1).  Sec. 7491(c); Rule 142(a);  Higbee v.             
          Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438, 446-447 (2001).  Accordingly,                   
          petitioners bear the burden of proving that the penalty is                  
          inapplicable.  Rule 142(a); INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503              
          U.S. 79, 84 (1992); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933);           
          Higbee v. Commissioner, supra.                                              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011