- 6 -
novo. E.g., Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000).
Where the underlying tax liability is not at issue, we review the
determination for abuse of discretion. Id. at 182.
Respondent concedes that petitioner has not had an
opportunity to dispute his liability for the section 6651(a)(2)
and section 6654 additions to tax and is therefore entitled to do
so in this proceeding. Consequently, we shall review de novo
respondent's determination that petitioner is liable for the
additions. See id.
Section 6651(a)(2) Addition to Tax
A taxpayer who fails to pay the tax shown on a return on or
before the date prescribed for payment of such tax is subject to
an addition to tax. Sec. 6651(a)(2). The date prescribed for
payment of income tax is the due date for filing the return
determined without regard to any extension of time for filing.
Sec. 6151(a). The addition to tax will not apply if it is shown
that the failure to pay was due to reasonable cause and was not
due to willful neglect. Sec. 6651(a)(2); see also United States
v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 245 (1985). A failure to pay is due to
reasonable cause if the taxpayer exercised "ordinary business
care and prudence in providing for payment of his tax liability".
Sec. 301.6651-1(c)(1), Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also Merriam
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-432. The determination of
whether reasonable cause exists is based on all the facts and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011