- 24 -
undertook significant investigation of the proposed investment
including researching EOR technology. The other taxpayer was a
geological and mining engineer whose work included research of
oil recovery methods and who hired an independent geologic
engineer to review the offering materials. Id. at 166. In the
present case, petitioners are not experienced or educated in
plastics recycling, and they did not independently investigate
the Sentinel EPE recyclers or hire an expert in plastics to
evaluate the Partnership transactions. We consider petitioners'
arguments with respect to the Krause case inapplicable.
2. Petitioner's Purported Reliance on an Adviser
Petitioner contends that he reasonably relied upon Bach as a
qualified adviser on this matter.
A taxpayer may avoid liability for the additions to tax
under section 6653(a)(1) and (2) if he or she reasonably relied
on competent professional advice. United States v. Boyle, 469
U.S. 241, 250-251 (1985); Freytag v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 849,
888 (1987), affd. 904 F.2d 1011 (5th Cir. 1990), affd. 501 U.S.
868 (1991). Reliance on professional advice, standing alone, is
not an absolute defense to negligence, but rather a factor to be
considered. Freytag v. Commissioner, supra. For reliance on
professional advice to excuse a taxpayer from the negligence
additions to tax, the taxpayer must show that such professional
had the expertise and knowledge of the pertinent facts to provide
informed advice on the subject matter. David v. Commissioner, 43
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011