- 19 - do not need to reach the issues of whether the resulting underpayments were substantial or were due to negligence because we find petitioner had reasonable cause and acted in good faith. A taxpayer’s reliance on the advice of a professional as to the tax treatment of certain items does not automatically constitute reasonable cause. Neonatology Associates v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 43, 98-99 (2000), affd. 299 F.2d 221 (3d Cir. 2002); see sec. 1.6664-4(c)(1), Income Tax Regs. For a taxpayer to reasonably rely on the advice of a professional, the taxpayer must show: (1) The adviser was a competent professional who had sufficient expertise to justify reliance; (2) the taxpayer provided necessary and accurate information to the adviser; and (3) the taxpayer actually relied in good faith on the adviser’s judgment. Neonatology Associates v. Commissioner, supra at 98-99. Mr. Rolling has a B.A. in business administration and a master’s degree in taxation. He is a licensed C.P.A. and has been practicing for more than 20 years. During the years in issue, Mr. Rolling prepared tax returns for petitioner and Caspian, and served as a general consultant to both on tax- related issues. Throughout the course of Mr. Rolling’s testimony, we found him to be a competent professional who had sufficient expertise to justify petitioner’s reliance. Based upon the testimony of petitioner and Mr. Rolling regarding thePage: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011