- 16 -
that his reliance was reasonable. Freytag v. Commissioner, 89 T.C.
849, 888 (1987), affd. 904 F.2d 1011 (5th Cir. 1990), affd. 501
U.S. 868 (1991).
In the case at bar, Mr. Fenton, petitioners' accountant, acted
merely as a scrivener; he did not audit or verify the information
given him by petitioners. Hence, we do not accept petitioners'
reliance on a professional advice defense.
Giving consideration to all the facts before us, we conclude
that petitioners were negligent and that they disregarded rules and
regulations with respect to the preparation of their 1989-91 tax
returns: They double deducted home mortgage interest and real
estate taxes; they claimed a $15,000 investment interest expense
when they had documentation indicating that, at best, they were
entitled to a $7,500 interest deduction; they claimed miscellaneous
employee business expenses for which Dr. Novick had been reimbursed
by his employer; they overstated expenses related to their rental
activities; and they failed to maintain adequate records.
Consequently, we sustain respondent's determination that
petitioners are liable for the accuracy-related penalty on the
amount of the underpayment for 1989, 1990, and 1991.
To reflect concessions by respondent,
Decision will be entered
under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Last modified: May 25, 2011