- 44 -
Accuracy-Related Penalty
Respondent determined that petitioners are liable for the
year at issue for the accuracy-related penalty under section
6662(a). In their reply brief, petitioners contend that respon-
dent’s determination is wrong because (1) “they correctly re-
ported their gift”, and (2) they “had substantial authority for
their return position that they gifted their St. Clair property
interests” to the University.14
Section 6662(a) imposes an accuracy-related penalty equal to
20 percent of the tax resulting from a substantial understatement
of income tax. An understatement is equal to the excess of the
amount of tax required to be shown in the tax return over the
14In their opening brief, petitioners assert:
Petitioners properly disclosed the relevant facts
relating to both the charitable contribution to the
University and the like-kind exchange. Accordingly,
the substantial understatement penalty is not here
applicable.
As we understand it, petitioners contend in their opening brief
that they made adequate disclosure within the meaning of sec.
6662(d)(2)(B)(ii) and the regulations thereunder with respect to
their claimed charitable contribution deduction. In their reply
brief, petitioners do not advance any argument relating to
disclosure of the “relevant facts” in their joint return. We
conclude that petitioners have abandoned the contention in their
opening brief that they made adequate disclosure within the
meaning of sec. 6662(d)(2)(B)(ii) and the regulations thereunder.
See Rybak v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 524, 566 n.19 (1988). Assum-
ing arguendo that we were to have concluded that petitioners did
not abandon that contention, we find on the instant record that
they did not adequately disclose the relevant facts surrounding
the claimed charitable contribution. See sec. 6662(d)(2)(B)(ii);
sec. 1.6662-4(e)(1) and (f)(1) and (2), Income Tax Regs.
Page: Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011