-287-
particulars of the transaction between the Ackerman group and CDR
or otherwise indicate that the banks had the tax bases that Mr.
Lerner later claimed for the SMHC receivables.
In trying to meet the reasonable cause exception,
petitioner focuses principally on his purported reliance on
“outside” professional tax advice. Reliance on the advice of a
professional tax adviser constitutes reasonable cause and good
faith if, under all the circumstances, the reliance was
reasonable and the taxpayer acted in good faith. Sec. 1.6664-
4(b)(1), Income Tax Regs.; cf. United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S.
241 (1985). All facts and circumstances must be taken into
account in determining whether a taxpayer has reasonably relied
in good faith on the opinion of a professional tax adviser as to
the treatment of the taxpayer (or any entity, plan, or
arrangement) under Federal tax law. Sec. 1.6664-4(c)(1), Income
Tax Regs. The advice must be based upon all pertinent facts and
circumstances and the law as it relates to those facts and
circumstances. Sec. 1.6664-4(c)(1)(i), Income Tax Regs. For
example, the advice must take into account the taxpayer’s
purposes (and the relative weight of such purposes) for entering
into a transaction and for structuring a transaction in a
particular manner. Id. In addition, the taxpayer cannot
establish reasonable reliance if he fails to disclose a fact that
Page: Previous 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011