- 21 -
of the items in issue or if the relevant facts relating to the
tax treatment were adequately disclosed on the return. Sec.
6661(b)(2)(B)(i) and (ii). Petitioner did not present any
evidence or argument that there was substantial authority for his
treatment of the items in issue or that the treatment was
adequately disclosed on his return. Accordingly, we conclude
that petitioner is liable for the addition to tax under section
6661 for 1988.
Section 6653(a) Addition to Tax
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for the
section 6653(a)(1) addition to tax for 1988. Section 6653(a)(1)
imposes an addition to tax equal to 5 percent of the underpayment
if any part of the underpayment is due to negligence or
intentional disregard of the rules or regulations. Negligence is
defined as a lack of due care or failure to do what a reasonable
and ordinarily prudent person would do under the circumstances.
Leuhsler v. Commissioner, 963 F.2d 907, 910 (6th Cir. 1992),
affg. T.C. Memo. 1991-179; Neely v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 934,
947-948 (1985). Petitioner bears the burden of proving that
respondent's determination is erroneous. Rule 142(a); Bixby v.
Commissioner, 58 T.C. 757, 791 (1972).
Petitioner presented neither evidence at trial nor argument
on brief regarding the negligence addition to tax for 1988.
Respondent's determination will be sustained.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011