Antim G. and Jane V. Straus - Page 11




                                        -10-                                          
               Petitioners, at trial, conceded that they should have                  
          reported on their 2003 return the respective distributions that             
          Northwestern Mutual, Merrill Lynch, and Commerce Bank made to               
          them during 2003.  Petitioners do not dispute that they received            
          Forms 1099 for each of the distributions at issue.  Petitioners             
          also concede that the understatement of tax on their 2003 return            
          exceeds the greater of 10 percent of the tax required to be shown           
          in that return or $5,000.  See sec. 6662(d)(1)(A).  Given                   
          petitioners’ concessions in this case, we find that respondent              
          has satisfied his burden of production with respect to section              
          7491(c) and the accuracy-related penalty.                                   
               In response, petitioners contend that they are not liable              
          for the accuracy-related penalty with respect to the Northwestern           
          Mutual distribution because they reasoned on a good-faith belief            
          that the cash surrender value from the policy should be excluded            
          from their gross income.  In determining whether a taxpayer has             
          acted in good faith, generally the most important factor “is the            
          extent of the taxpayer’s effort to assess the taxpayer’s proper             
          tax liability.”  Sec. 1.6664-4(b)(1), Income Tax Regs.                      
               We are not convinced, based on the record before us, that              
          petitioners took any steps prior to the filing of their 2003                
          return to assess the income tax treatment of the Northwestern               
          Mutual distribution.  Moreover, we note that it was only after              
          they received their notice of deficiency that petitioners thought           







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007