- 27 - States, supra. Accordingly, petitioners and Sidney’s estate are sufficiently related to be treated as one taxpayer for purposes of the duty of consistency. Respondent has established that all three elements of the duty of consistency are present in this case. Conrad and Carroll agreed that the discounted value of the collection was $14,500,000, and the Commissioner relied upon that value in assessing the estate tax owed by Sidney’s estate. Once the period for assessment against Sidney’s estate had closed, however, petitioners claimed that the collection’s undiscounted value should be used to calculate the gallery’s COGS. Because all three elements of the duty of consistency are satisfied, we hold that petitioners are bound to use the collection’s discounted value as their basis for purposes of calculating the gallery’s COGS for 1990 through 1997. Section 6662 Accuracy-Related Penalties In petitioners’ statutory notices of deficiency, respondent asserted accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a) for (1) negligence or disregard of rules or regulations, (2) substantial understatement of income tax, or (3) substantial valuation overstatement. On brief, however, respondent abandons the negligence ground and asserts only that petitioners are liable for the accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a) for a substantial understatement of tax under section 6662(b)(2).Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011