- 22 - petitioner’s tools. Our resolution of the issues in this case required careful examination of the relevant laws, trial exhibits, and testimony. Petitioners’ omission of the reimbursement income from IMC was made in good faith and with the belief that the reimbursement arrangement would qualify as an accountable plan. It was not unreasonable that petitioners did not report any of the income, since the arrangement between petitioner and Mr. Kerkinni provided that petitioner would not receive any reportable wages from IMC, and petitioner did not receive a Form W-2 for any of the years in issue. In addition, petitioners’ failure to report the proceeds they received for petitioner’s tools was a result of their belief that the payments did not exceed petitioner’s basis in the tools. Based on the information they had, petitioners made an effort to comply with the tax laws in preparing their returns. Therefore, we conclude that the accuracy-related penalty is not appropriate, and petitioners are not liable for the penalty pursuant to section 6662. To reflect the foregoing and concessions by respondent, Decision will be entered under Rule 155.Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Last modified: May 25, 2011