- 70 -
was within the scope of the advisers' expertise, the
interpretation of the tax laws as applied to undisputed facts.
In these cases, particularly with respect to valuation,
petitioners relied upon advice that was outside the scope of
expertise and experience of their advisers. Consequently, we
consider petitioners' reliance on the Mauerman case inapplicable.
We hold that petitioners did not have a reasonable basis for
the adjusted bases or valuations claimed on their tax returns
with respect to their investments in the Partnerships. In these
cases respondent properly could find that petitioners' reliance
on Becker and the offering materials was unreasonable. The
records in these cases do not establish an abuse of discretion on
the part of respondent but support respondent's position. We
hold that respondent's refusal to waive the section 6659 addition
to tax is not an abuse of discretion. Petitioners are liable for
the respective section 6659 additions to tax at the rate of 30
percent of the underpayments of tax attributable to the
disallowed tax benefits. Respondent is sustained on this issue.
Decisions will be entered
under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Last modified: May 25, 2011