- 18 - v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-314, we found that each Sentinel EPS recycler had a fair market value not in excess of $50,000, and relied heavily on the overvaluation of the recyclers in concluding that the taxpayer was negligent and liable for accuracy-related penalties. A. Section 6653(a)(1) and (2) Negligence In these cases, respondent determined that petitioners were liable for additions to tax for negligence under section 6653(a)(1) and (2) with respect to underpayments attributable to petitioners’ investment in Masters. In each case, petitioners contend that they were not negligent because: (1) They reasonably relied in good faith upon the advice of advisers, including a competent and experienced accountant, in deciding to invest in Masters, and (2) they intended to make a profit from their investment in Masters. Section 6653(a)(1) and (2) imposes additions to tax if any part of the underpayment of tax is due to negligence or intentional disregard of rules or regulations. Negligence is defined as the failure to exercise the due care that a reasonable and ordinarily prudent person would exercise under the circumstances. See Neely v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 934, 947 (1985). The pertinent question is whether a particular taxpayer’s actions are reasonable in light of the taxpayer’s experience, the nature of the investment, and the taxpayer’sPage: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011