Eddie Cordes, Inc., et al. - Page 40




                                       - 40 -                                         
          or that their purported reliance on Mr. Hinman was in good faith            
          or reasonable.  The Cordeses did not show they requested or                 
          received advice regarding these transactions, and any advice                
          regarding those transactions that were discussed was based on               
          incomplete and inaccurate information, information withheld by              
          Mr. Cordes.                                                                 
               The facts before us simply do not establish that the                   
          reasonable cause exception in section 6664(c) applies.                      
          Therefore, the Cordeses are liable for the accuracy-related                 
          penalty due to negligence or disregard of rules or regulations              
          for the taxable years before us, to the extent the Rule 155                 
          computation shows an underpayment of tax.                                   
          V.   The Fraud Penalty                                                      
               Respondent determined that CFC and Mr. Cordes are liable for           
          the fraud penalty for their 1994 and 1995 taxable years.  Section           
          6663(a) provides:  “If any part of any underpayment of tax                  
          required to be shown on a return is due to fraud, there shall be            
          added to the tax an amount equal to 75 percent of the portion of            
          the underpayment which is attributable to fraud.”  Section                  
          6663(b) provides that if any portion of an underpayment is                  
          attributable to fraud, then the entire underpayment shall be                
          treated as attributable to fraud unless the taxpayer shows by a             
          preponderance of the evidence that a portion was not so                     
          attributable.  Respondent has the burden of proving fraud by                
          clear and convincing evidence.  Sec. 7454(a); Rule 142(b).                  







Page:  Previous  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011