- 15 -
credible evidence corroborating her testimony that this was
indeed their characterization of the payment. She also presents
no credible evidence that Mr. Hoiland or Mr. Skone was competent
to advise her on the taxable nature of the payment she received.
Petitioner’s claims that Mr. Skone told her the payment was a
gift are even harder to believe because Mr. Skone prepared her
State tax return reporting the payment as income.
Petitioner also claims to have relied upon the advice of Mr.
Pettegrove. This is dubious as he offered none. He relied on
her characterization of the payment as a gift and made no further
inquiry. Particularly troubling is the fact that he completely
disregarded the Form 1099-MISC from PCI that petitioner provided
to him.
After considering all of the facts and circumstances, we
find that petitioner failed to establish that she had reasonable
cause and acted in good faith with respect to the underpayment.
Accordingly, we sustain respondent’s determination that
petitioner is liable for the accuracy-related penalty.
We have considered all the remaining arguments that the
parties made and, to the extent not addressed, we find them to be
irrelevant, moot, or meritless.
To reflect the foregoing and the concessions of the parties,
Decision will be entered
under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: March 27, 2008