Orneal and Martha Kooyers, et al. - Page 40

                                       - 40 -                                         
          was in violation of the grantor trust provisions.  See Zmuda v.             
          Commissioner, 731 F.2d 1417 (9th Cir. 1984); Holman v. United               
          States, 728 F.2d 462 (10th Cir. 1984); O’Donnell v. Commissioner,           
          726 F.2d 679 (11th Cir. 1984); Hanson v. Commissioner, 696 F.2d             
          1232 (9th Cir. 1983); Schulz v. Commissioner, 686 F.2d 490 (7th             
          Cir. 1982); Vnuk v. Commissioner, 621 F.2d 1318 (8th Cir. 1980);            
          Wesenberg v. Commissioner, 69 T.C. 1005 (1978).                             
               A taxpayer’s adoption of a flagrant tax avoidance scheme               
          that has repeatedly been rejected by the courts is patently                 
          negligent.  Wesenberg v. Commissioner, supra at 1015; see also              
          Hanson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1981-675.  Respondent has                
          produced ample evidence to demonstrate that the OMK trusts lacked           
          economic substance and served no real purpose other than tax                
          avoidance.  Additionally, petitioners created the OMK trust after           
          this Court and other courts had considered several cases                    
          involving similar abusive trusts and determined that the trusts             
          would not be respected for Federal income tax purposes.  See,               
          e.g., Zmuda v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 714 (1982); Markosian v.               
          Commissioner, 73 T.C. 1235 (1980); Schneider v. Commissioner,               
          T.C. Memo. 1987-560; Hanson v. Commissioner, supra.                         
          Consequently, we conclude that respondent provided sufficient               
          evidence that petitioners’ understatement of tax was due to                 
          negligence or disregard of rules and regulations and has met the            








Page:  Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011