-13- with reasonable cause and in good faith. Sec. 6664(c)(1). Whether a taxpayer acted as such is a factual determination, sec. 1.6664-4(b)(1), Income Tax Regs., for which the taxpayer’s effort to assess the proper tax liability is an important consideration. Here, respondent has met his burden of production in that the understatement on petitioners’ return is “substantial” within the meaning of section 6662(d)(1). Petitioners argue that they acted reasonably and in good faith towards the subject matter of the deficiency. We agree. On the basis of the record before us, we find that petitioners were cognizant as to the issue of the taxability of the $132,000 and that they reasonably relied upon the advice and representations of professionals to conclude that the payment was not taxable. United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 250 (1985) (reasonable reliance on the advice of a competent adviser may be a defense to the accuracy-related penalty). Although respondent notes correctly that petitioners did not heed Boise’s advice to attach the 2000 Form 1099-MISC to their 2000 return, we know of no requirement (nor has respondent identified any such requirement) that petitioners have attached that form to their 2000 return.3 We also decline to find as a fact respondent’s assertion on brief that petitioners did not heed Boise’s advice to include the $132,000 in their income. The 3 We note our finding that Nageley did not withhold any Federal income tax on the $132,000 payment that it made to Kidd.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011