Kierstead

Kierstead v. Commissioner

Good Law
330 F. App'x 126
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 11, 2009No. 07-74870California622 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Glenn and Carol Kierstead appeal the decision of the United States Tax Court finding them liable for accuracy-related penalties under I.R.C. § 6662. They elaim *127 they should not be subject to penalties because they believed in good faith, based on advice of counsel, that their use of the G. Kierstead Holdings Trust and the G. Kierstead Family Trust (the “Trusts”) was proper. We have jurisdiction under I.R.C. § 7482(a)(1), and we affirm.

The Commissioner’s decision to impose negligence penalties is presumptively correct. Hansen v. Comm’r, 820 F.2d 1464, 1469 (9th Cir.1987). The taxpayer bears the burden of proving that he is eligible for an exception to the penalty. I.R.C. § 7491(a), (c); Higbee v. Comm’r, 116 T.C. 438, 446-47 (2001). We review for clear error the Tax Court’s findings of fact and its finding that a taxpayer is liable for accuracy-related penalties. See Keane v. Comm’r, 865 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir.1989); Custom Chrome, Inc. v. Comm’r, 217 F.3d 1117, 1121 (9th Cir.2000).

Reliance on the advice of a tax professional may demonstrate reasonable cause for an understatement of tax, if the reliance was reasonable and in good faith. See United States v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.