- 17 -
imposes a penalty in an amount equal to 20 percent of the
underpayment of tax attributable to one or more of the items set
forth in section 6662(b). Respondent asserts that the entire
underpayment in issue was due to petitioner's negligence or
disregard of rules or regulations. Sec. 6662(b)(1).
Negligence has been defined as the failure to do what a
reasonable and ordinarily prudent person would do under the
circumstances. Neely v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 934, 947 (1985).
Respondent's determinations are presumed correct, and petitioner
bears the burden of proving otherwise. Rule 142(a); Luman v.
Commissioner, 79 T.C. 846, 860-861 (1982). However, reasonable
reliance upon expert opinion, asserted in good faith, can shield
a taxpayer from penalties for negligence or disregard under
section 6662. Glick v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-65; see
also United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 250 (1985); Collins v.
Commissioner, 857 F.2d 1383, 1386 (9th Cir. 1988), affg. Dister
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-217.
The operative facts that control the propriety of
petitioner's accruals present a reasonably close case.
Petitioner had certified public accountants prepare its returns
for each of the years in issue. They advised that the royalty
and interest accruals be taken as deductions on the tax returns
for the years in issue. We find that petitioner reasonably
relied upon the opinion of its accountants when claiming the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011