- 6 - on that advice must be reasonable. See United States v. Boyle, supra at 250; see also Bowman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993- 88. By the very nature of the advice given, petitioner's reliance on that advice was not reasonable. See Bowman v. Commissioner, supra; see also Sanders v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-452 ("While petitioner may have honestly believed that she did not have to file tax returns, that belief was not reasonable."). Petitioner has not established that his failure to file timely returns was due to a reasonable cause. Accordingly, we sustain respondent's determinations on this issue. Respondent determined an addition to tax under section 6654(a) for underpayment of individual estimated tax. Petitioner failed to pay estimated tax during the years in issue, and he has offered no evidence to show that he qualifies for one of the exceptions provided in section 6654(e). Thus, respondent's determinations on this issue are sustained. The Tax Court is authorized under section 6673(a)(1) to require a taxpayer to pay to the United States a penalty not in excess of $25,000 when it appears to the Court that the taxpayer's position in the proceeding is frivolous or groundless. Petitioner's position, based on stale and meritless contentions, is manifestly frivolous and groundless, and his action has resulted in the waste of limited judicial andPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011