Peter and Ursula Reimann, et al. - Page 46

                                       - 46 -                                         
          from our finding of a lack of economic substance.  Petitioners              
          conceded that the Scarborough and Plymouth transactions were                
          similar to the Clearwater transaction described in Provizer v.              
          Commissioner, supra, and that the Scarborough and Plymouth                  
          transactions lacked economic substance.  Given those concessions,           
          and the fact that the records here plainly show that the                    
          overvaluation of the recyclers was the reason for the                       
          disallowance of the tax benefits, and the fact that no argument             
          was made and no evidence was presented to the Court to prove that           
          disallowance and concession of the tax benefits related to                  
          anything other than a valuation overstatement, we conclude that             
          the deficiencies caused by the disallowance of the claimed tax              
          benefits were attributable to the overvaluation of the Sentinel             
          EPE recyclers.                                                              
               Finally, we consider petitioners' express arguments as to              
          waiver of the addition to tax under section 6659.  On brief,                
          petitioners each contested imposition of the section 6659                   
          addition to tax on the grounds that respondent erroneously failed           
          to waive the addition to tax.  Section 6659(e) authorizes                   
          respondent to waive all or part of the addition to tax for                  
          valuation overstatement if taxpayers establish that there was a             
          reasonable basis for the adjusted bases or valuations claimed on            
          the returns and that such claims were made in good faith.                   
          Respondent's refusal to waive a section 6659 addition to tax is             
          reviewable by this Court for abuse of discretion.  Krause v.                
          Commissioner, 99 T.C. at 179.                                               



Page:  Previous  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011