- 14 - States, supra, to be distinguishable and not binding on this Court. Petitioner also cites Pelham v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-441 in support of his case. The taxpayers in Pelham were uneducated and unsophisticated investors who were introduced to their financial planner by their personal accountant, with whom they had a prior relationship of trust. They invested in a tax shelter based on the assurances of their accountant and the financial planner, who was later indicted for fraud and filing fraudulent tax returns. Clearly, petitioner is distinguishable from the taxpayers in Pelham. Petitioner attempts to distinguish himself from the taxpayers in Charlton v. Commissioner, supra, by arguing that he relied on independent counsel and specifically on the appraisal by McGraw-Hill. We find petitioner's reliance to be inadequate; as an attorney he should have exercised more care. While he did not have considerable experience with tax shelters, petitioner is well educated and was sophisticated in business. By his own testimony, petitioner owned and managed a law firm that at one time employed 18 or 19 attorneys, and he earned close to $900,000 in fees during 1983. We conclude that a reasonable person with his background would have been on notice that further investigation of the investment in MSA was warranted.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011