- 103 - and that the partners did not knowingly participate in this fraud. Petitioners argue that it would be an absurd result to penalize and impose section 6621(c) interest against these victims of Jay Hoyt’s fraud, who (petitioners allege) invested without the principal purpose of tax avoidance and genuinely believed that their partnership was engaged in a legitimate business activity. Petitioners further argue that since they have conceded all of the depreciation deductions and investment credits that the Hoyt sheep partnerships claimed, the Court should find that there are no valuation overstatements because any statements of value or adjusted basis on the partnership returns concerning the partnership’s purported breeding sheep are now irrelevant. In making this argument, petitioners are relying upon and seeking to come within the decisions by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Ninth Circuits and this Court in Todd v. Commissioner, 862 F.2d 540 (5th Cir. 1988), affg. 89 T.C. 912 (1987), Gainer v. Commissioner, 893 F.2d 225 (9th Cir. 1990), affg. T.C. Memo. 1988-416, and McCrary v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 827 (1989), respectively. Todd, Gainer, and McCrary all held that the section 6659 addition to tax for valuation overstatement was inapplicable where the taxpayer conceded that no deductions or credits were allowable, due to property not having been placed in service.Page: Previous 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011