- 28 - Goldman v. Commissioner, 39 F.3d 402, 408 (2d Cir. 1994), affg. T.C. Memo. 1993-480; Freytag v. Commissioner, supra. A taxpayer’s reliance on representations by insiders, promoters, or offering materials is not sufficient to establish that a taxpayer reasonably relied on competent professional advice. Neonatology Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner, supra; Goldman v. Commissioner, supra at 408; LaVerne v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 637, 652-653 (1990), affd. without published opinion 956 F.2d 274 (9th Cir. 1992), affd. in part without published opinion sub nom. Cowles v. Commissioner, 949 F.2d 401 (10th Cir. 1991); Berry v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-311; Ferraro v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-324. Pleas of reliance have also been rejected when the adviser knew nothing about the nontax business aspects of the contemplated venture. See Freytag v. Commissioner, supra at 888; Beck v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 557, 572-573 (1985); Buck v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-191. Petitioner contends that he acted with due care and did not fail to do what a reasonable or ordinarily prudent person would do under the circumstances because: (1) His background was in the fields necessary for him to have conducted a thorough analysis of the scientific and economic merits of the investment, and he conducted such an analysis; (2) he relied on his tax return preparer, HG&C, and Boylan & Evans; and (3) he invested in Madison primarily to earn a profit and only secondarily for itsPage: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011