- 34 -
of Appeals in the Provizer case, where we held the taxpayers
negligent. Consistent therewith, we find in these cases, as we
have found previously, that the reports prepared by Carmagnola
are unreliable and of no consequence. Petitioners are not
relieved of the negligence additions to tax based on the
preliminary reports prepared by Carmagnola.
Petitioners' reliance on Mollen v. United States, 72 AFTR2d
93-6443, 93-2 USTC par. 50,585 (D. Ariz. 1993) is misplaced. The
taxpayer in Mollen was a medical doctor who specialized in
diabetes and who, on behalf of the Arizona Medical Association,
led a continuing medical education ("CME") accreditation program
for local hospitals. The underlying tax matter involved the
taxpayer's investment in Diabetics CME Group, Ltd., a limited
partnership which invested in the production, marketing, and
distribution of medical educational video tapes. The taxpayer's
personal expertise and insight in the underlying investment gave
him reason to believe it would be economically profitable.
Although the taxpayer was not experienced in business or tax
matters, he did consult with an accountant and a tax lawyer
regarding those matters. Moreover, as the District Court noted,
the propriety of the taxpayer's disallowed deduction therein was
"reasonably debatable."
The records in these cases, on the other hand, show that
neither petitioners nor their advisers, Bachmann and Greene, had
any formal education, expertise, or experience in plastics or
plastics recycling. None of them had any personal insight or
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011