- 8 -
* * * it is reasonable for the taxpayer to rely on that advice."
Id. at 251.
Whether reasonable cause exists when the taxpayer has relied
on an accountant or attorney to prepare a return correctly
depends on the facts and circumstances. See Neonatology
Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 43, 98 (2000), affd.
299 F.3d 221 (3d Cir. 2002). Compare Metra Chem Corp. v.
Commissioner, 88 T.C. 654, 661-663 (1987) (reliance on accountant
with complete information regarding taxpayer's business
activities not reasonable cause where taxpayer's cursory review
of return would have revealed errors), and Pritchett v.
Commissioner, 63 T.C. 149, 174-175 (1974) (reliance on accountant
with complete information on transaction not reasonable cause
even where proper treatment of item "requires a fair degree of
expertise and sophistication"),4 with Harrison v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 1998-417 (taxpayer's reliance on accountant's
computation of estimated tax liability for purposes of extension
request is reasonable cause for late filing), and Drummond v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-71 (to same effect for extension
request; to same effect for other items where taxpayer's review
of return would not have revealed errors), affd. in part and
revd. in part without published opinion 155 F.3d 558 (4th Cir.
4 We need not and do not decide herein whether the holding
in Pritchett v. Commissioner, 63 T.C. 149 (1974), can be fully
reconciled with United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241 (1985).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011