Michael W. Keller - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         
          section 6662(h) of $4,442 and $6,932, respectively.1  After                 
          concessions,2 the only issues for decision are:  (1) Whether                
          petitioner is liable for 40-percent accuracy-related penalties              
          under section 6662(h); and (2) in the alternative, whether                  
          petitioner is liable for 20-percent accuracy-related penalties              
          under section 6662(b)(1) or (2).                                            
                                  FINDINGS OF FACT                                    
               Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.               
          The first, second, and third stipulations of fact and the                   
          attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference.                
          Petitioner resided in Escondido, California, when he filed his              
          petition.                                                                   
          A.   Hoyt and the Hoyt Partnerships                                         
               The issues in this case revolve around petitioner’s                    
          investment in a partnership organized and promoted by Walter J.             
          Hoyt III (Hoyt).  Hoyt’s father was a prominent cattle breeder.             
          To expand his business and attract investors, Hoyt’s father                 
          started organizing and promoting cattle breeding partnerships in            
          the late 1960s.  Before his father’s death in early 1972, Hoyt              


               1  All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code,            
          as amended, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of           
          Practice and Procedure.  Amounts are rounded to the nearest                 
          dollar.                                                                     
               2  Petitioner concedes that:  (1) He did not realize any               
          farm income in 1994 and 1995; and (2) he is not entitled to the             
          deductions claimed on Schedules F, Profit or Loss From Farming,             
          attached to his 1994 and 1995 Federal income tax returns.                   




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011