- 10 -
Cir. 1999) (quoting Heasley v. Commissioner, 902 F.2d 380, 383
(5th Cir. 1990)), affg. T.C. Memo. 1997-385.
Petitioners’ primary argument is that they were not
negligent because they relied on advice from Mr. Trimboli.
Reasonable reliance on professional advice may be a defense to
the negligence additions to tax. United States v. Boyle, 469
U.S. 241, 250-251 (1985); Freytag v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 849,
888 (1987), affd. 904 F.2d 1011 (5th Cir. 1990), affd. on another
issue, 501 U.S. 868 (1991). The advice must be from competent
and independent parties, not from the promoters of the
investment. LaVerne v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 637, 652 (1990),
affd. without published opinion sub nom. Cowles v. Commissioner,
949 F.2d 401 (10th Cir. 1991), affd. without published opinion
956 F.2d 274 (9th Cir. 1992); Rybak v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 524,
565 (1988).
Petitioners analogize their case to the case of Anderson v.
Commissioner, 62 F.3d 1266, 1271 (10th Cir. 1995), affg. T.C.
Memo. 1993-607. In Anderson, the taxpayer relied on both an
investment adviser and an accountant in making his investment.
The court found that reliance on the investment adviser, who
received a commission for selling the investment to the taxpayer,
was reasonable under the circumstances of the case. Cf., e.g.,
Carmena v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-177 (financial adviser
receiving commissions for sale of investments had inherent
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011