Valentina Perrah v. Commissioner - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                         
          Cir. 1996), affg. T.C. Memo. 1995-46.  An understatement of                 
          income tax is substantial if it exceeds 10 percent of the tax               
          required to be shown on the return for the taxable year or                  
          $5,000, whichever is greater.  Sec. 6662(d)(1)(A).3                         
               As pertinent here, “negligence” includes the failure to make           
          a reasonable attempt to comply with the provisions of the                   
          Internal Revenue Code and also includes any failure to keep                 
          adequate books and records or to substantiate items properly.               
          Sec. 6662(c); sec. 1.6662-3(b)(1), Income Tax Regs.  It is the              
          taxpayer’s responsibility to establish that he is not liable for            
          the accuracy-related negligence penalty imposed by section                  
          6662(a).  See Rule 142(a); Tweeddale v. Commissioner, 92 T.C.               
          501, 505 (1989).4  As we have held that petitioner failed to                
          comply with the basic requirements of substantiation and record-            
          keeping contained in the Internal Revenue Code, we find that                
          petitioner’s underpayment was due to negligence and is subject to           
          the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a).                         
               A taxpayer may avoid the application of the accuracy-related           
          penalty by proving that he or she acted with reasonable cause and           
          in good faith.  Sec. 6664(c).  Whether a taxpayer acted with                
          reasonable cause and good faith is measured by examining the                


               3 We need not address whether petitioner’s understatement of           
          income was substantial because we hold that she is liable for the           
          accuracy-related penalty due to negligence.                                 
               4 See supra note 2.                                                    





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011