- 72 -
independent attorneys and accountants for advice as to whether
payments were properly deductible or capitalized. The advice
relied upon by the taxpayer in Mauerman was within the scope of
the advisers' expertise, the interpretation of the tax laws as
applied to undisputed facts. In these cases, particularly with
respect to valuation, petitioners relied upon advice that was
outside the scope of expertise and experience of their purported
advisers. Consequently, petitioners' reliance on the Mauerman
case is rejected.
We hold that petitioners did not have a reasonable basis for
the adjusted bases or valuations claimed on their tax returns
with respect to their investments in the Partnerships. In these
cases, respondent could find that petitioners' respective
reliance on the offering materials and their colleagues was
unreasonable. The records in these cases do not establish an
abuse of discretion on the part of respondent but support
respondent's position. We hold that respondent's refusal to
waive the section 6659 additions to tax in these cases is not an
abuse of discretion. Petitioners are liable for the respective
section 6659 additions to tax at the rate of 30 percent of the
underpayments of tax attributable to the disallowed tax benefits.
Respondent is sustained on this issue.
Page: Previous 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011