- 24 -
Commissioner, 949 F.2d 401 (10th Cir. 1991); Marine v.
Commissioner, 92 T.C. 958, 992-993 (1989), affd. without
published opinion 921 F.2d 280 (9th Cir. 1991); McCrary v.
Commissioner, 92 T.C. 827, 850 (1989); Rybak v. Commissioner, 91
T.C. 524, 565 (1988). We have rejected pleas of reliance when
neither the taxpayer nor the advisers purportedly relied upon by
the taxpayer had substantial knowledge about the nontax business
aspects of the contemplated venture. Beck v. Commissioner, 85
T.C. 557 (1985); Flowers v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. 914 (1983);
Steerman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-447.
Based upon our review of the entire records in these cases,
we hold that Brodie's purported reliance on Greene, and Reimann's
and the Yarnells' purported reliance on Bachmann, was not
reasonable, not in good faith, nor based upon full disclosure.
Neither Bachmann or Greene, nor petitioners, nor anyone
affiliated with Bachmann, Schwartz, had any education or work
experience in plastics materials or plastics recycling. None of
petitioners and no one at Bachmann, Schwartz consulted any
independent experts or conducted anything approaching a
meaningful investigation.8 While Bachmann and Abramson did visit
8 According to Abramson, Bachmann had a cousin who was an
engineer and taught at City College of New York. Abramson
testified that he thought Bachmann asked his cousin for the
cousin's opinion of the feasibility of the Sentinel EPE recycling
machinery and process. However, Abramson did not elaborate on
the cousin's response; he testified only that he was certain
Bachmann and he discussed the results of Bachmann's
investigation. We consider Abramson's testimony on this matter
of no probative value. We are not convinced that Bachmann spoke
(continued...)
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011