Oreland A. and Lucille S. Thornsjo - Page 39




                                       - 39 -                                         
          Commissioner, 893 F.2d 225 (9th Cir. 1990); Irom v. Commissioner,           
          866 F.2d 545, 547 (2d Cir. 1989), vacating in part T.C. Memo.               
          1988-211; Harness v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-321.                     
               In these cases, petitioners each stipulated substantially              
          the same facts concerning the Hamilton transaction as we found in           
          Provizer v. Commissioner, supra.  In Provizer, we held that the             
          taxpayers were liable for the section 6659 addition to tax                  
          because the underpayment of taxes was directly related to the               
          overvaluation of the recyclers.  The overvaluation of the                   
          recyclers, exceeding 2,325 percent, was an integral part of our             
          findings in Provizer that the transaction was a sham and lacked             
          economic substance.  Similarly, the overvaluation of the                    
          recyclers was integral to and was the core of our holding that              
          Hamilton was a sham and lacked economic substance.                          
               Petitioners’ reliance on McCrary v. Commissioner, supra, is            
          misplaced.  In McCrary, the taxpayers conceded entitlement to               
          their claimed tax benefits, and the section 6659 addition to tax            
          was held inapplicable.  However, the taxpayers’ concession of the           
          claimed tax benefits, in and of itself, did not preclude                    
          imposition of the section 6659 addition to tax.  In McCrary v.              
          Commissioner, supra, the section 6659 addition to tax was                   
          disallowed because the agreement at issue was conceded to be a              
          license and not a lease.  In contrast, in these cases                       
          petitioners’ underpayments were attributable to overvaluation of            






Page:  Previous  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011