- 27 -
as an expert in jojoba.18 Yet the record demonstrates that
petitioner never spoke with this individual.19 At best, petitioner
merely visited the university and “looked at some of the
documentations that Dr. Yermanos had prepared” regarding the
jojoba plant. In short, there is simply nothing in the record to
indicate that this individual provided any advice to petitioner
that would absolve petitioners from liability for the additions to
tax for negligence.
Petitioners contend that petitioner reasonably relied on
advice from Mr. Maryanov concerning the proper tax treatment of
the partnership loss at the time that their 1983 tax return was to
be filed. However, this individual did not testify at trial, so
we do not know first hand what knowledge or experience he may have
had regarding either jojoba or the deductibility of R&D expenses,
what advice he may have given, or on what basis any such advice
may have been rendered. The record establishes only that Mr.
Maryanov prepared petitioners’ tax return, relying on the Schedule
18 We note that this individual did not testify at trial, so
we know essentially nothing about him. We also note that no
mention is made of a “Dr. Yermanos” in Utah Jojoba I Research v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-6.
19 Although Mr. Kellen may have spoken to this individual,
there is nothing in the record to even suggest that this
individual knew about the existence of San Nicholas, much less
the details regarding the promotion.
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011