- 14 -
failed to carry his burden of establishing that he could not have
been reimbursed by McKendree for the claimed gifts.
On the record before us, we find that petitioner has failed
to carry his burden of establishing that he is entitled for his
taxable year 1999 to the deduction under section 162(a) that he
claims as unreimbursed employee business expenses for the claimed
gifts.6
Accuracy-Related Penalty
It is respondent’s position that petitioner is liable for
his taxable year 1999 for the accuracy-related penalty under
section 6662(a) because of negligence or disregard of rules or
regulations under section 6662(b)(1).
The term “negligence” in section 6662(b)(1) includes any
failure to make a reasonable attempt to comply with the Code.
Sec. 6662(c). Negligence has also been defined as a failure to
do what a reasonable person would do under the circumstances.
See Leuhsler v. Commissioner, 963 F.2d 907, 910 (6th Cir. 1992),
affg. T.C. Memo. 1991-179; Antonides v. Commissioner, 91 T.C.
686, 699 (1988), affd. 893 F.2d 656 (4th Cir. 1990). The term
6Assuming arguendo that petitioner had established the
deductibility under sec. 162(a) of the claimed gifts, he would
still have to satisfy the requirements of sec. 274(b) and (d) and
the regulations thereunder. On the record before us, we find
that petitioner has failed to satisfy those requirements. See
sec. 274(b) and (d); sec. 1.274-3, Income Tax Regs.; sec. 1.274-
5T(b)(5), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46016 (Nov. 6,
1985).
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007