- 69 -- 69 -
these taxpayers knew or should have known better. We hold, upon
consideration of the entire records, that petitioners are liable
for the negligence additions to tax under the provisions of
section 6653(a) for the taxable years at issue. Respondent is
sustained on this issue.
B. Section 6659--Valuation Overstatement
In notices of deficiency, respondent determined that
petitioners Gollin and Fredericks were liable for the section
6659 addition to tax on the portion of their respective
underpayments attributable to valuation overstatement. In a
stipulation of settled issues, the Fredericks conceded the
section 6659 addition to tax on the portion of their underpayment
attributable to the disallowance of the investment tax and
business energy credits claimed as a result of their
participation in the Plastics Recycling Program. Petitioners
Gollin have the burden of proving that respondent's determination
of the section 6659 addition to tax in their case is erroneous.
Rule 142(a); Luman v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. at 860-861.
In an amendment to answer, respondent asserted that
petitioners Fishbach were liable for the section 6659 addition to
tax on the portion of their underpayment attributable to
valuation overstatement. Because the section 6659 addition to
tax was raised for the first time in the amendment to answer, the
burden of proof is shifted to respondent. Rule 142(a); Vecchio
v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 170, 196 (1994). For convenience, in
Page: Previous 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011