- 17 -
Conclusions reached in * * * legal opinions or opinions
rendered by other tax professionals * * * are not
authority. The authorities underlying such expressions
of opinion where applicable to the facts of a particu-
lar case, however, may give rise to substantial author-
ity for the tax treatment of an item. * * * [Sec.
1.6661-3(b)(2), Income Tax Regs.]
Although petitioner testified that he relied upon petition-
ers' tax adviser Mr. Amsterdam to determine the loss and the
credit in question, there is no evidence in the record regarding
what, if any, authority Mr. Amsterdam relied on in determining
petitioners' entitlement to those items.
Although not altogether clear, petitioners appear to argue
that they are entitled under section 6661(c) to a waiver of the
addition to tax under section 6661(a) because their understate-
ment of income tax was the result of relying upon Mr. Amsterdam
when petitioner invested in Ridge Energy and when they filed
their 1983 return. Section 6661(c) allows respondent to waive
all or a portion of the addition to tax under section 6661(a)
upon a showing by the taxpayer that there was reasonable cause
for the understatement (or a part thereof) and that the taxpayer
acted in good faith. The regulations under section 6661(c)
provide in pertinent part:
In making a determination regarding waiver of the
penalty under section 6661, the most important factor *
* * will be the extent of the taxpayer's effort to
assess the taxpayer's proper tax liability under the
law. * * * In addition, circumstances that may indicate
reasonable cause and good faith include an honest
misunderstanding of fact or law that is reasonable in
light of the experience, knowledge, and education of
the taxpayer. * * * Reliance on an information return
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011