- 15 -
have put the taxpayer on notice that he was not backing the
advice embodied in the return), affd. 992 F.2d 1132 (11th Cir.
1993). Respondent contends that petitioner did not have
substantial authority or reasonable cause for its minimum
expensing position because petitioner’s chief financial officer,
Pamela Rau (Rau), did not discuss the deductibility of the
disputed assets with petitioner’s tax return preparer for 1995
and 1996. We disagree. Rau reasonably explained that she did
not discuss petitioner’s expensing policy with the preparer
because petitioner’s expensing policy in 1995 and 1996 was the
same as it had been in previous years. Petitioner's reliance on
its preparer was reasonable cause for expensing the disputed
assets in 1995 and 1996.
We hold that petitioner is not liable for the accuracy-
related penalty under section 6662 for 1995 and 1996.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: May 25, 2011