Robert H. Avellini - Page 23

                                                - 23 -                                                  
            such concession.  For a detailed discussion of the facts and the                            
            applicable law, see Provizer v. Commissioner, supra.                                        
            Issue 4.  Sec. 6653(a) Negligence                                                           
                  In her first amendment to answer, respondent asserted that                            
            petitioner was liable for the negligence-related additions to tax                           
            under section 6653(a)(1) and (2) for 1981.  Because these                                   
            additions to tax were raised for the first time in respondent's                             
            amendment to answer, respondent bears the burden of proof on this                           
            issue.  Rule 142(a); Vecchio v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 170, 196                             
            (1994).                                                                                     
                  Section 6653(a)(1) provides for an addition to tax equal to                           
            5 percent of the underpayment if any part of an underpayment of                             
            tax is due to negligence or intentional disregard of rules or                               
            regulations.  In cases involving negligence, an additional amount                           
            is added to the tax under section 6653(a)(2); such amount is                                
            equal to 50 percent of the interest payable with respect to the                             
            portion of the underpayment attributable to negligence.                                     
            Negligence is defined as the failure to exercise the due care                               
            that a reasonable and ordinarily prudent person would employ                                
            under the circumstances.  Neely v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 934, 947                           
            (1985).  The question is whether a particular taxpayer's actions                            
            in connection with the transactions were reasonable in light of                             
            his experience and the nature of the investment or business.  See                           
            Henry Schwartz Corp. v. Commissioner, 60 T.C. 728, 740 (1973).                              






Page:  Previous  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011