- 39 -
requirements and also provided an exception where there is
reasonable cause for failure to comply with the substantiation
requirements for noncash charitable contributions. Petitioners
contend that the reasonable cause exception in AJCA was a
codification of preexisting law. Respondent contends that the
reasonable cause exception was not the law before the 2004
enactment. We agree with respondent.
Petitioners rely, in great part, on the legislative history
surrounding the 1984 enactment of DEFRA section 155, which in
effect, directed the Secretary to promulgate the qualified
appraisal regulations. It appears that a reasonable cause
exception was considered by Congress, but no such exception was
included in DEFRA, and none appeared in the regulations issued
pursuant to the regulatory mandate of DEFRA section 155. We find
no sound basis for accepting petitioners’ contention that a
reasonable cause exception existed before the 2004 enactment of
that exception.
Because the charitable contribution deductions we consider
are for years before and unaffected by AJCA, we are left to
decide whether petitioners substantially complied, like the
taxpayers in Bond v. Commissioner, supra, or whether the
information included on and with their income tax returns was
insufficient to meet the statutory and regulatory requirements
Page: Previous 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008