- 133 - Respondent cites numerous badges of fraud, such as the creation and backdating of documents, false statements in documents, the use of nominees, and the failure to disclose related-party information to the IRS. The facts indicate, and we have concluded in previous portions of this opinion, that petitioners backdated and created documents, put false information in documents, used nominees to sign documents, and presented the false documents to the IRS. However, the presence of badges of fraud will not automatically negate an alternative explanation for petitioners' actions. Ishijima v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-353; Klein v. Commissioner, supra. Petitioners argue that they are not liable for additions to tax and penalties for fraud or negligence because they reasonably and in good faith followed the advice of C&L and other professionals. In their brief, petitioners state "they had no reason to believe that the advice they received was incorrect, nor did they have the knowledge or experience to second-guess that advice" (citing United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 251 (1985)). Respondent argues that petitioners were sophisticated businessmen who were able to function in a highly competitive environment, and, therefore, they cannot claim reliance on their advisers, particularly if petitioners failed to provide the advisers with correct and complete information. See Pessin v. Commissioner, 59 T.C. 473, 489 (1972). Additionally, respondentPage: Previous 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011