Derwyn J. Booker - Page 21

          either the master’s value or its potential for profit.                      
          Petitioner did not listen to the master or determine its quality            
          before signing the master recording lease.  Petitioner argues               
          that he sought and relied upon the advice of several people in              
          the record industry.  While petitioner did casually elicit                  
          information from several individuals, petitioner failed to                  
          provide sufficient evidence indicating that he sought the advice            
          of a professional investment counselor.  The record indicates               
          that petitioner primarily contacted Encore promoters and                    
          individuals at the various distribution companies connected with            
          Encore.  Investors cannot escape the negligence penalty by                  
          relying on the advice of persons who are not professional                   
          investment counselors.  Pasternak v. Commissioner, 990 F.2d at              
          903; Rybak v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 524, 565 (1988).                        
               We find that a reasonably prudent person would have sought             
          the advice of an independent tax adviser in a situation such as             
          this where the return is immediately several times as much as the           
          initial investment.  See Pasternak v. Commissioner, supra at 903;           
          McCrary v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 827, 850 (1989); Harris v.                 
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1981-46 (“To anyone * * * not                      
          incorrigibly addicted to the ‘free lunch’ philosophy of life, the           
          entire scheme had to have been seen as a wholly transparent                 
          sham.”).                                                                    
               Based upon the record in the instant case, we find that                
          petitioner’s actions do not approach the actions that a                     






Page:  Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011