- 46 -
correctly. Leroy Jewelry Co., Inc. v. Commissioner, 36 T.C. 443,
445 (1961). In the instant case, petitioner did not present
sufficient evidence to justify a finding that the accuracy-
related penalty for negligence is not applicable. In addition to
the several holdings in this opinion in favor of respondent,
petitioner conceded48 that several income items representing
substantial amounts were omitted from his Federal income tax
returns. Such omissions included the failure to report
substantial amounts of interest income, a guaranteed payment from
a partnership, taxable Social Security benefits, and distributive
shares of income from S corporations. These omissions were due
to errors petitioner did not attempt to check.
No accuracy-related penalty shall be imposed with respect to
any portion of an underpayment if it is shown that there was
reasonable cause for such portion and that the taxpayer acted in
good faith with respect to such portion. Sec. 6664(c)(1).
Petitioner argues that he also relied upon outside accountants
and, thus, he should not be liable for the accuracy-related
penalty. In order for a taxpayer’s reliance on advice to be
reasonable so as to negate a section 6662(a) accuracy-related
penalty, this Court requires that the taxpayer prove by a
preponderance of the evidence that the adviser was a competent
professional who had sufficient expertise to justify reliance;
48See appendixes A and B.
Page: Previous 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011