- 14 -
next consider whether the taxpayer acted with reasonable cause
and in good faith. Our consideration of this aspect is based on
pertinent facts and circumstances, including the taxpayer’s
efforts to assess his or her proper tax liability, the knowledge
and experience of the taxpayer, and the reliance on the advice of
a professional. Sec. 1.6664-4(b)(1), Income Tax Regs. When a
taxpayer relies on the professional judgment of a competent tax
adviser and provides him or her with all relevant information,
the taxpayer’s behavior is consistent with ordinary business care
and prudence. United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 250-251
(1985).
To establish reasonable cause through reliance on the advice
of a tax adviser, the taxpayer must meet a three-prong test, laid
out by Neonatology Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner, supra at 99:
(1) The adviser was a competent professional who had sufficient
expertise to justify reliance, (2) the taxpayer provided
necessary and accurate information to the adviser, and (3) the
taxpayer relied in good faith on the adviser’s judgment.
Petitioner bears the burden of proof with respect to the
defenses to the accuracy-related penalty. See Higbee v.
Commissioner, supra at 446-447. Petitioner has not established
that she had reasonable cause and acted in good faith.
Petitioner claims that she relied on Mr. Hoiland and Mr.
Skone’s characterization of the payment. Petitioner presents no
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008