- 23 -
1(i), Income Tax Regs. Furthermore, petitioners provided Forms
2119 and 4797 on September 16, 1996, only after being requested to
do so by the IRS auditor; but they failed to execute the forms.12
Petitioners failed to satisfy the requirements of section
1034. Petitioner, as a tax attorney and former Wisconsin Tax
Appeals commissioner, knew, or at least should have known, of the
section 1034 requirements; he chose not to follow them.
Petitioners failed to demonstrate that they were not negligent.
See, e.g., Milkowski v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-406; Notter
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1982-96. Indeed, the record indicates
that they were.
Accordingly, we sustain respondent's determinations with
respect to the section 6662(a) accuracy-related penalty.
To reflect the foregoing and petitioners' concessions,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
12 Petitioners argue that they filed a 1994 Form 2688,
Application for Additional Extension of Time To File U.S.
Individual Income Tax Return, which notified the IRS of the sale
of the Mequon residence. At most, Form 2688 notified respondent
that petitioners sold a residence in 1994, which would have been
their Ely residence.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Last modified: May 25, 2011