- 46 -
assumed such responsibility, and he fully described the
particulars of his investigation, taking care not to
mischaracterize it as "due diligence."
In the end, Becker and petitioners relied on PI personnel
for the value of the Sentinel EPE recyclers and the economic
viability of the Partnership transactions. See Vojticek v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-444, to the effect that advice from
such persons "is better classified as sales promotion." A
taxpayer may rely upon his adviser's expertise (in these cases,
accounting and tax advice), but it is not reasonable or prudent
to rely upon a tax adviser regarding matters outside of his field
of expertise or with respect to facts that he does not verify.
See David v. Commissioner, 43 F.3d at 789-790; Goldman v.
Commissioner, 39 F.3d at 408; Skeen v. Commissioner, 864 F.2d 93
(9th Cir. 1989), affg. Patin v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1086
(1987); Lax v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-329; Sacks v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-217; Rogers v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1990-619; see also Zenkel v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-
398, Estate of Busch v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-342; Spears
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-341, with respect to Becker's
advice in Plastics Recycling cases.
3. The Private Offering Memoranda
In addition to purportedly relying on Becker, Green, and
their respective tax return preparers, petitioners maintain that
Page: Previous 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011