- 52 -
Respondent maintains that Hinz relied on Christy to file the
tax return on time, that this was an attempt to delegate a
nondelegable duty, and that this does not constitute reasonable
cause for failing to timely file the tax return. Respondent
contends that, “additionally, it was not reasonable for Mr.
Christy to believe that the estate had been granted an extension
to file the Federal estate tax return until February 4, 1994”.
Both sides rely on the opinion of the Supreme Court in
United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241 (1985). Respondent stresses
the focus of the Court in Boyle on the executor’s duty to timely
file the estate tax return. Petitioner points to the Supreme
Court’s ratification through Boyle of judicial holdings that
reliance on counsel’s advice constitutes reasonable cause, and
contends that Hinz relied on Christy’s advice and that Hinz did
not delegate to Christy the duty of timely filing. Respondent
contends that Hinz delegated the duty to Christy and did not
merely rely on Christy’s advice.
We agree with respondent’s conclusion and with some of
respondent’s analysis.
21(...continued)
155.
Page: Previous 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011