Matthew P. Brown - Page 10

                                        - 9 -                                         
          4(b)(1), Income Tax Regs.  Section 1.6664-4(b)(1), Income Tax               
          Regs., specifically states:  “Circumstances that may indicate               
          reasonable cause and good faith include an honest                           
          misunderstanding of fact or law that is reasonable in light of              
          * * * the experience, knowledge, and education of the taxpayer.”            
               Pursuant to section 7491(c), the Commissioner has the burden           
          of production with respect to a section 6662 accuracy-related               
          penalty.  To meet this burden, the Commissioner must produce                
          sufficient evidence indicating that it is appropriate to impose             
          the relevant penalty.  Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438, 446            
          (2001).  Once the Commissioner meets this burden of production,             
          the taxpayer continues to have the burden of proof with regard to           
          whether the Commissioner’s determination of the penalty is                  
          correct.  Rule 142(a); Higbee v. Commissioner, supra.  Further,             
          the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that he or she acted               
          with reasonable cause and in good faith.  See sec. 6664(c)(1).              
               Respondent’s burden of production is satisfied in this case            
          since petitioner failed to maintain records to substantiate                 
          expenses as required.  Petitioner did not present any argument or           
          evidence that the reporting of the claimed mileage deductions was           
          based on reasonable cause or good faith.  Petitioner did not                
          attempt to satisfy the record-keeping requirements for his                  
          mileage expense deductions, nor did he attempt to reconstruct the           
          expense deductions at trial.  We conclude that petitioner has               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011