DHL Corporation and Subsidiaries - Page 81

                                        - 164 -                                       
          included an additional reasonable cause and good faith exception            
          to the section 6662(e) penalty for transfer pricing valuation               
          misstatements.  Finally, the substantial understatement penalty             
          does not apply to understatements attributable to (1) items                 
          supported by “substantial authority” or (2) items that are                  
          “adequately disclosed” on the return.  Sec. 6662(d)(2)(B).  With            
          respect to the section 6662 determinations, petitioners bear the            
          burden of showing that the penalty does not apply.  Rule 142(a);            
          Tweeddale v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 501, 505 (1989) (citing Bixby            
          v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 757, 791 (1972)).                                  
               Negligence includes any failure “to make a reasonable                  
          attempt to comply with the provisions of this title”.  Sec.                 
          6662(c).  A taxpayer may not be negligent where the taxpayer                
          relies in good faith upon an appraisal in reporting a                       
          transaction.  Petitioners argue that they relied in good faith              
          upon Bain’s $20 million appraisal of the trademark rights that              
          DHL conveyed.  Petitioners point out that Bain was well known to            
          them and had worked on strategy and planning in connection with             
          the UPS discussions, assisted in the UPS negotiations, and                  
          prepared the PLP costing model used by DHL and the PRISM costing            
          model used by DHLI.  Petitioners claim that they relied on Bain’s           
          background and expertise and that the reliance was reasonable, so           
          they were not negligent in reporting the $20 million gain from              
          the trademark sale.                                                         






Page:  Previous  153  154  155  156  157  158  159  160  161  162  163  164  165  166  167  168  169  170  171  172  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011