- 12 - Language in Heasley v. Commissioner, supra at 386, suggesting that profit objective, for purposes of section 6621(c) increased interest, be evaluated at the individual investor level is not apropos. Heasley did not involve a partnership investment. In light of the lack of profit objective and the lack of economic substance associated with the activities and investments of the Garfield and Cardinal limited partnerships, petitioners are liable for increased interest under section 6621(c). Other arguments made by petitioners and not addressed specifically herein have been considered and are rejected. For the reasons stated, respondent's imposition of increased interest under section 6621(c) is sustained. We shall grant respondent’s motion for partial summary judgment and deny petitioners’ motion for partial summary judgment. To reflect the foregoing, an appropriate order will be issued.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Last modified: May 25, 2011