Homer v. Commissioner ( 1993 )


Menu:
  • February 9, 1993
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the First Circuit
    No. 92-1513
    HOMER F. AND DOROTHY L. MCMURRAY,
    Petitioners, Appellants,
    v.
    COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
    Respondent, Appellee.
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES TAX COURT
    [Hon. Theodore Tannenwald, Jr., United States Tax Court Judge]
    No. 92-1628
    HOMER F. AND DOROTHY L. MCMURRAY
    Petitioners, Appellants,
    v.
    COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
    Respondent, Appellee.
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES TAX COURT
    [Hon. Stephen J. Swift, United States Tax Court Judge]
    Before
    Torruella, Circuit Judge,
    Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge, and
    Stahl, Circuit Judge.
    Aline H. Lotter for appellants.
    Gary  R.  Allen  with  whom  James  A.  Bruton,  Acting  Assistant
    Attorney  General,  Tax  Division,  Department of  Justice,  Bruce  R.
    Ellisen, and  William J. Patton  and Abraham N.M. Shashy,  Jr. were on
    brief for appellee.
    February 9, 1993
    STAHL,   Circuit  Judge.    In  these  consolidated
    appeals,  Dorothy L.  McMurray  and Homer  F. McMurray  ("the
    McMurrays"),  challenge decisions  of  the United  States Tax
    Court which upheld determinations made by the Commissioner of
    Internal Revenue  ("the Commissioner") that the McMurrays are
    jointly liable  for income tax deficiencies  for 1984 through
    1988, as well as  penalties stemming from those deficiencies.
    The deficiencies are  based on the Commissioner's  conclusion
    that the McMurrays overstated the value of certain charitable
    land donations.  For  the reasons that follow, we  affirm the
    deficiency determinations,  but  reverse  a  portion  of  the
    penalty assessments.
    I.
    Background
    The central  issue in this  case is  the amount  of
    charitable deduction to which the McMurrays are entitled as a
    result  of donating property  known as  the Ponemah  Bog,1 in
    Amherst, New Hampshire ("the Bog"), to the Audubon Society of
    New Hampshire  ("Audubon").   The McMurrays, who  are husband
    1.  Ponemah is a  "kettle hole" bog, formed by  glaciers over
    12,000 years ago.   As the   climate warmed and the  glaciers
    receded, vegetation grew on the edges of a pond formed by the
    melting blocks of ice.   Although the  pond was too deep  and
    steep-sided to  support the  growth  of many  types of  marsh
    plants, some, such as sphagnum (peat) moss, were able to grow
    out  over the  edge of  the pond  and float  on the  surface.
    Eventually, a peat  mat formed on  the surface, which  became
    thick enough to support  shrubs and stunted trees.   Over the
    course  of thousands of years, the pond gradually filled with
    peat and the remains of dead vegetation.
    -2-
    2
    and wife, in 1954 acquired the  approximately 72-acre Bog and
    other contiguous parcels of land.
    In  February  1978,   Audubon  solicited  from  the
    McMurrays2  a donation  of the  Bog, in  order to  ensure its
    perpetual preservation.   The McMurrays agreed,  and in 1979,
    1982  and 1985  conveyed their  interests in  the Bog  and an
    abutting  residential  lot to  the  Audubon  Society in  four
    separate  transactions.  Only the  value of the  1982 and two
    1985 conveyances are at issue in this case.
    In 1979,  the McMurrays conveyed  the eastern  24.6
    acres of  the Bog to Audubon.   In April 1982,  the McMurrays
    conveyed a 65  percent interest in the  remaining 47.57 acres
    of the  Bog.   On  their joint federal income  tax return for
    1982, the  McMurrays claimed  that the  fair market  value of
    their contribution to Audubon was $780,000.  They  based this
    valuation on a "letter of opinion" from appraiser Patricia J.
    Donovon, who  concluded  that the  fair market  value of  the
    property was $25,000 to $27,000 per acre, or between $750,000
    and $800,000.  The McMurrays took a $118,981 deduction on the
    1982 return,  and calculated  that $349,019 would  be carried
    over to future years.
    2.  The  record  indicates that  Homer  F.  McMurray was  the
    principal  actor in all  Bog-related transactions.   However,
    because  their joint-taxpayer  status  places both  McMurrays
    before us, we refer  to all actions as though  they were done
    jointly.
    -3-
    3
    In September 1985,  after carrying over  deductions
    of  $122,458 and  $117,721, respectively,  on their  1983 and
    1984 returns, the McMurrays conveyed to Audubon the remaining
    35  percent  interest in  the Bog.    In December  1985, they
    transferred  a one acre residential lot abutting the Bog.  In
    March 1986, Donovon provided  the McMurrays with an appraisal
    for  the two 1985 donations.  Donovon increased the price per
    acre to $35,000, and concluded  that the 35 percent  interest
    in  the  Bog  had  a  value  of  $580,000.   She  valued  the
    residential lot at $55,000  to $60,000, resulting in  a total
    1985 charitable conveyance value of $635,000 to $640,000.
    On their 1985 return, the McMurrays claimed a value
    of  $637,500  for  the  donated  property.    They  used  the
    remaining  $123,200 carryover  from  the  1982 donation,  and
    claimed $10,636 from the 1985 transfers on their 1985 return,
    leaving   a  $371,864  carryover.     The  McMurrays  claimed
    deductions of $170,597 in 1986, $135,115 in 1987, and $76,788
    in 1988.
    Upon conducting an examination of the McMurrays' returns
    for 1984, 1985 and 1986, the Commissioner determined that the
    fair market value of the  1982 conveyance was $23,200, rather
    than $780,000,  as the  McMurrays claimed.   Accordingly, the
    Commissioner ruled that  there was no carryover  from 1982 to
    either  1983 or  1984,  and thus  no deduction  allowable for
    1984.  The Commissioner also ruled that the fair market value
    -4-
    4
    of  the 1985  Bog  transfer was  $6,250,  as opposed  to  the
    $580,000 the  McMurrays claimed;  and that the  value of  the
    residential lot transferred the  same year was $35,000 rather
    than  $57,500, as claimed by  the McMurrays.   Based on these
    figures, the  Commissioner determined that the McMurrays were
    entitled  to  a  1985  deduction  of  $24,750,  and  that  no
    carryovers  were  available  for  future years.    Thus,  the
    Commissioner found deficiencies for 1984, 1985 and 1986.  The
    Commissioner also  asserted additions  to tax under  I.R.C.
    6653 for  negligence and  intentional disregard of  rules and
    regulations,  and under I.R.C.   6659 for underpayment of tax
    attributable to  a charitable  valuation overstatement.   The
    Commissioner  subsequently  determined  tax deficiencies  for
    1987 and 1988,  as well  as additions to  tax under  sections
    6653 and 6659.3
    3.  The deficiencies  and additions to tax  determined by the
    Commissioner and upheld by the Tax Court are as follows:
    Sec.     Sec.      Sec.       Sec.
    6653     6653      6653       6653      Sec.
    Year    Def.    (a)(1)   (a)(2)  (a)(1)(A)   (a)(1)(B)   6659
    1984  $65,327   $3,266      *        -           -      $19,598
    1985  $53,552   $2,676      *        -           -      $16,058
    1986  $85,176      -        -      $4,259        *      $25,553
    1987  $50,539      -        -      $2,527        *      $15,162
    1988  $22,981      -        -      $1,149        *      $ 6,894
    *  penalty assessed is 50 percent of the interest due on
    the deficiency.
    -5-
    5
    In March  1990, the  McMurrays filed a  petition in
    the  tax court seeking  a redetermination of  the 1984, 1985,
    and  1986 deficiencies.   On  March 19,  1992, the  tax court
    ruled against the McMurrays (Appeal No. 92-1513).  Meanwhile,
    in March  1991, the  McMurrays had sought  redetermination of
    their  1987 and 1988 deficiencies.   The Commissioner filed a
    motion for summary judgment  in the 1991-filed case, claiming
    that the McMurrays were collaterally estopped by the decision
    in the  1990 case  from relitigating the  1985 contributions.
    On April 23, 1992,  the tax court granted  the Commissioner's
    motion  for summary  judgment  (Appeal No.  92-1628).   These
    appeals followed.4
    II.
    Discussion
    A.  The Deficiencies
    Section 170  of  the Internal  Revenue  Code  ("the
    Code")  allows taxpayers  to deduct  charitable contributions
    subject to percentage-of-income  limitations and to carryover
    excess contributions.   If a charitable  contribution is made
    of  property other than money, the amount of the contribution
    is the fair  market value of the property at  the time of the
    contribution.   Treas.  Reg.    1.170A-1(c)(1).   Fair market
    value  is "the price at which the property would change hands
    4.  In  their  reply  brief,  the  McMurrays  indicate  their
    abandonment  of the  collateral  estoppel issue.   Thus,  our
    decision here will apply to both cases.
    -6-
    6
    between a willing buyer  and a willing seller,  neither being
    under  any compulsion  to  buy or  sell,  and both  having  a
    reasonable  knowledge  of relevant  facts."    Treas. Reg.
    1.170A-1(c)(2).  The Commissioner's determination of the fair
    market value  of donated  property is presumptively  correct,
    and the taxpayer has the burden of proving the Commissioner's
    determination to be  erroneous.  Welch v. Helvering, 
    290 U.S. 111
    , 115  (1933); Pescosolido v. Commissioner,  
    883 F.2d 187
    ,
    189 (1st Cir. 1989).  The  fair market value of property is a
    reflection of the "highest  and best use" of the  property on
    the  date of valuation.   Symington v.  Commissioner, 
    87 T.C. 892
    , 896 (1986); Stanley Works  v. Commissioner, 
    87 T.C. 389
    ,
    400  (1986).   The tax  court's ruling  with respect  to fair
    market  value is a factual finding that we must affirm unless
    it  is clearly erroneous.  Sammons  v. Commissioner, 
    838 F.2d 330
    , 333  (9th Cir.  1988); Ebben  v. Commissioner, 
    783 F.2d 906
    , 909 (9th Cir. 1986).
    Here, both  sides agree the highest and best use of
    the  Bog is as a  natural preserve.   The McMurrays, however,
    believe the commercial value of the peat contained in the Bog
    should be taken into  account in any valuation.5   In support
    of  their theory,  the McMurrays submitted  to the  tax court
    appraisals  by  Boston  College  Coastal  Research  Institute
    5.  According  to record evidence, peat can be used as a fuel
    source for electric power generation.
    -7-
    7
    Professor  Dr. Benno  Brenninkmeyer, Richard  Kasevich, chief
    financial  officer  of  a  Maine  peat-mining operation,  and
    botany professor  Ian Worley.6   Brenninkmeyer estimated  the
    value  of the  peat in  the Bog,  as a  fuel resource,  to be
    greater  than  $35  million;  Worley  calculated  the  profit
    potential  of harvesting  the peat;  Kasevich compiled  a pro
    forma income  statement demonstrating the profitability  of a
    hypothetical harvesting operation on the Bog.
    Before  the  tax  court,  the  Commissioner  relied
    exclusively for the valuation of the gift on the appraisal of
    Joseph  G. Fremeau.  After giving much weight to the presence
    of state and local zoning restrictions on the use of the Bog,
    and interviewing several people  involved in the variance and
    permitting  process, Fremeau  opined that  any request  for a
    permit to harvest the peat or otherwise develop the Bog would
    have met  substantial  opposition during  the  relevant  time
    period  and   would  have  had  little   chance  of  success.
    Accordingly,  Fremeau's valuation  focused on sale  prices of
    eight other supposedly comparable wetland properties suitable
    for  conservation  purposes  and  which had  sold  at  prices
    6.  Although the Tax Court considered the Donovon  appraisals
    accompanying the McMurrays' tax returns  as part of the  peat
    valuation theory,  it is  evident  from the  record that  the
    McMurrays  essentially abandoned  reliance on  Donovon before
    the  Tax Court  and included  her appraisal  only as  part of
    their  argument  against penalties,  see  infra.   Thus,  for
    purposes of  our examination of the  peat valuation evidence,
    we  discuss  neither  Donovon's  work, nor  the  Tax  Court's
    criticism thereof.
    -8-
    8
    between $200 and $800  per acre.  Fremeau concluded  that the
    Bog had a value of $400 per  acre, for a total of $12,500 for
    the  1982 transfer, and $6,700  for the 1985  transfer.  With
    respect  to  the   residential  lot,  Fremeau   evaluated  20
    comparable sales and  found a  range in the  Amherst area  of
    $22,533 to $58,000.   As the lot in question is  smaller than
    many other Amherst house  lots and is encumbered by  a right-
    of-way easement owned by Audubon, Fremeau's $35,000 valuation
    fell toward the lower end of the scale.
    In  the end,  the  tax court  found the  McMurrays'
    evidence  inadequate because,  unlike Fremeau, none  of their
    experts took into account  the restrictions on harvesting the
    peat or the costs  associated with such an operation.   Thus,
    the court concluded that the  McMurrays failed to carry their
    burden  of proving  that the  value of  the Bog  exceeded the
    Commissioner's  determination.    Based  on  our   review  of
    pertinent  case law, we cannot say the tax court's ruling was
    clearly erroneous.
    It  is well  settled  that  legal  restrictions  on
    development or other encumbrances  diminish a property's fair
    market value.   For example, in Great  Northern Nekoosa Corp.
    v.  United States, 
    711 F.2d 473
     (1st Cir.  1983), a taxpayer
    donated a parcel of land  to the State of Maine for  which he
    claimed  a fair  market  value of  $1  million based  on  his
    expert's   valuation  of  the  property   as  a  site  for  a
    -9-
    9
    hydroelectric power  plant.  Prior to  the donation, however,
    the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 
    82 Stat. 906
     (1968),
    was  enacted,  which  could  have barred,  inter  alia,  such
    construction,   a  fact  not  considered  by  the  taxpayer's
    appraisal.  We concluded  that the taxpayer's valuation could
    not be  the  fair  market  value "inasmuch  as  any  rational
    prospective purchase would necessarily  take into account the
    potential  realization of  that  encumbrance."   Id. at  475.
    Therefore--despite our  less than complete  satisfaction with
    the  Commissioner's expert  appraisal--we concluded  that the
    taxpayer failed  to bear  its burden of  proving a  valuation
    higher than that of the Commissioner.
    Here, too, we have  a taxpayer appraisal that fails
    to consider  potential legal obstacles toward  fulfilling the
    property's  full  monetary  potential.     Moreover,  as  the
    Commissioner  points out, the  McMurrays' experts also failed
    to  consider many other aspects of a peat mining operation in
    arriving at their conclusion.7   Thus, given the shortcomings
    7.  For   example,  Brenninkmeyer  reached  his  $35  million
    conclusion by multiplying the  Bog's estimated volume by $145
    per ton, which was the average  retail price of coal in 1989.
    He  failed, however, to assess the market for peat during the
    relevant  time period,  or  the costs  and  feasibility of  a
    complete peat  extraction.   Kasevich's income  statement was
    based on the 1990 peat harvesting figures of his own company,
    but did  not include any  potential overhead costs.   Worley,
    relying  on  Kasevich's  income  statement,  assumed, without
    factual  support,  that  all  equipment  could  be  purchased
    outright,  and   thus  did  not  consider   financing  costs.
    Significantly, both  Kasevich and Worley alluded  to the fact
    that successes in  the peat harvesting business were few, and
    -10-
    10
    of  the  McMurrays'   experts'  reports,   the  tax   court's
    conclusion that  the McMurrays  failed to carry  their burden
    was not clearly erroneous.
    In the  alternative, the  McMurrays  argue that  if
    state and  local regulatory  constraints deprive them  of the
    Bog's  economic potential,  then  they are  entitled to  just
    compensation under  the United States Constitution  in return
    for a regulatory taking.  See Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal
    Council,     U.S.    , 
    112 S. Ct. 2886
     (1992).  Even assuming
    that Lucas would  turn the regulations  involved here into  a
    "taking,"  the  short  answer  is  that  the  McMurrays  have
    overlooked the fact  that any such "taking"  was performed by
    state  and local authorities, and as such gives them no right
    to seek  compensation--via  tax deductions--from  the  United
    States, an  entirely different  sovereign.  Moreover,  to the
    extent that the McMurrays argue for including the value of an
    inverse condemnation suit against  the State of New Hampshire
    in the  Bog valuation, the tax court correctly concluded that
    the success of such a suit is not as assured as the McMurrays
    declare, and  that  the record  is  "devoid of  any  evidence
    that  most of  the peat harvesting  operations of  which they
    were aware had failed.   While Kasevich's Down East  Peat Co.
    was an  apparent exception,  we cannot  quarrel with  the Tax
    Court's conclusion  that  reliance on  Down East's  financial
    performance to  estimate the McMurray's potential  success is
    "like saying  that anybody  opens a hamburger  chain and  you
    estimate the profit potential by what McDonald's does."
    -11-
    11
    directed  toward valuing any such  claim."  Thus  we find the
    tax court did not err in rejecting this argument.
    Finally, the  McMurrays argue that  the tax court's
    reliance on  Fremeau's use of comparative sales  to value the
    Bog was inappropriate due to  the Bog's uniqueness.  Instead,
    the McMurrays,  relying on Estate of  Palmer v. Commissioner,
    
    839 F.2d 420
       (8th  Cir.  1988),  assert  that  the  Bog's
    replacement cost would be a better method.  We disagree.  The
    McMurrays, unlike  the taxpayers in Palmer,  have provided no
    evidence  of replacement cost and thus we find no clear error
    in the tax court's  reliance on Fremeau's evaluation method.8
    Accordingly, we  affirm the  tax court's decision  to uphold
    the Commissioner's deficiency determinations.9
    8.  While it  is true  that Fremeau's  comparative properties
    were not identical to the Bog in some respects, the Tax Court
    found that  they were  the most comparable  for the  relevant
    time and  place.   See  Symington,  
    87 T.C. at 900
     (in  the
    absence  of  identical  properties, comparable  sales  method
    takes  into  account  differences,  and  through  appropriate
    adjustment, arrives at a value for the subject property).  As
    the  record demonstrates  that the  compared properties  were
    also non-developable  wetlands, and that state  Fish and Game
    and Forest Protection Society personnel held  at least two of
    the properties in  the same high esteem  as the Bog,  we find
    the   Tax  Court's   endorsement  of   Fremeau's  methodology
    eminently supportable.  See Anselmo v. Commissioner, 
    757 F.2d 1208
    ,  1213 (11th  Cir. 1985)  (Tax Court's  determination of
    proper  comparable market is  a question  of fact  subject to
    reversal only if clearly erroneous).
    9.  The McMurrays have not  addressed any appellate  argument
    to the valuation of the residential  lot transferred in 1985.
    Therefore, we deem the argument abandoned.  See, e.g., United
    States  v. Slade, No. 92-1176,  slip op. at  6, n.3 (1st Cir.
    Nov. 24, 1992).
    -12-
    12
    B.  Additions to Tax and Penalties
    1.  Negligence
    Section  6653(a)(1) of  the  1954 Code  and Section
    6653(a)(1)(A) of the 1986  Code impose an addition to  tax of
    five  percent of an income tax underpayment where any part of
    the  underpayment   is  due  to  negligence   or  intentional
    disregard of rules or regulations.  Section 6653(a)(2) of the
    1954  Code and Section 6653 (a)(1)(B) of the 1986 Code impose
    a penalty of 50 percent of the interest due on the portion of
    any  underpayment attributable  to negligence.10   Negligence
    in this context is a lack of due care or failure to do what a
    reasonable and  ordinarily prudent person would  do under the
    circumstances.  Allen v. Commissioner, 
    925 F.2d 348
    , 353 (9th
    Cir. 1991).   The  Commissioner's imposition of  a negligence
    addition is presumptively correct, leaving the McMurrays with
    the  burden of proving that their underpayment was not due to
    negligent  or  intentional  rules  violations.    Leuhsler v.
    Commissioner, 
    963 F.2d 907
    , 910 (6th Cir. 1992).
    The McMurrays argue, as  they did below, that their
    good faith  reliance on  Donovon--a professional  real estate
    appraiser--for the  valuations stated on their  1982 and 1985
    returns justifies reversal of the extra assessment.  The  tax
    10.  The relevant statutes were renumbered for  taxable years
    in  which a  return is due  after December  31, 1986.   Their
    substance  remained the same, however.  See Tax Reform Act of
    1986, Pub. L. No. 99-514,   1503(a), 
    100 Stat. 2085
    .
    -13-
    13
    court, however, found that the McMurrays did not sufficiently
    establish   that   they   reasonably   relied   on  Donovon's
    appraisals, "beyond the bare fact that the [] appraisals were
    attached  to the [] returns."   The court  then combined four
    factors--its  disparaging  view  of  Donovon's   report,  the
    McMurrays'  failure to  testify as  to their  reliance, their
    abandonment  of her appraisals at  trial, and evidence of the
    McMurrays'  knowledge  of  real  estate  development  in  the
    Amherst area--to conclude that they had failed to demonstrate
    their reasonable reliance.  We disagree.11
    Reasonable reliance on expert opinion,  asserted in
    good  faith,  can  shield  a taxpayer  from  section  6653(a)
    penalties.  United States v. Boyle, 
    469 U.S. 241
    , 250 (1985);
    Collins v. Commissioner, 
    857 F.2d 1383
    , 1386 (9th Cir. 1988);
    Betson v.  Commissioner, 
    802 F.2d 365
    , 372 (9th  Cir. 1986).
    The record  reflects that after being  approached by Audubon,
    the  McMurrays sought  professional  advice from  lawyers and
    accountants, as well as an appraiser.  In our view, the "bare
    fact"  that the  McMurrays attached  Donovon's  appraisals to
    support  their 1982  and 1985  returns  is evidence  of their
    reliance  on the appraisals.   In other words,  why else were
    they  submitted with the returns,  but for the  fact that the
    11.  It  is unclear from the record whether the Tax Court was
    questioning  the McMurrays'  actual reliance  on Donovon,  or
    whether any such reliance was reasonable.  With that in mind,
    we will delve into both areas.
    -14-
    14
    McMurrays  were relying on them?  Furthermore, we fail to see
    how  any of  the other  factors cited  by  the tax  court are
    probative of the McMurrays' reliance.  For instance, the fact
    that the McMurrays pursued a different legal tack at trial in
    1991  has  little  bearing  on the  reasonableness  of  their
    actions in 1982 and 1985.  Also, while the McMurrays may have
    some knowledge  as to  "real estate development,"  the record
    evidence of such knowledge falls far short  of requiring them
    to  second-guess a  licensed appraiser--especially  one whose
    1979 appraisal apparently passed muster with the Commissioner
    as  support for the deductions taken for the 1979 conveyance.
    Finally, we note that the minimal probative value assigned by
    the  tax  court to  the  McMurrays' expert  opinion  does not
    mandate a finding of bad faith or unreasonable reliance.  See
    Sammons,  
    838 F.2d at 337
      (although  taxpayer's   expert
    appraisal  was  not  entitled  to  any  probative  weight  in
    determining   the  fair   market   value  of   a   charitable
    contribution, imposing a negligence penalty was inappropriate
    because taxpayers  had no  reason to question  their expert's
    ability) (citing  Biagiotti v. Commissioner, 
    52 T.C.M. (CCH) 588
    , 595  (1986)).  We  conclude, therefore, that  the record
    lacks  sufficient evidence  of bad faith  to support  the tax
    court's negligence ruling, and instead compels a finding that
    the McMurrays met their burden of proof on this issue.
    2.  Valuation Overstatement
    -15-
    15
    Section 6659 of the Code imposes an addition to tax
    if  the amount  of  any underpayment  of  $1,000 or  more  is
    attributable  to  a  valuation  overstatement  of  charitable
    deduction  property.12    For  purposes of  this  section,  a
    valuation overstatement exists where the claimed value is 150
    percent  or more  of  the amount  determined  to be  correct.
    I.R.C.   6659(c)(1).   Here, the McMurrays claimed a donation
    value  of $803,933 in 1982, and a  value of $637,500 in 1985.
    The tax  court, however, ruled  that the values  were $12,500
    and  $41,700,   respectively.    These   figures  place   the
    McMurrays'  overstatement beyond the 150 percent threshold of
    section 6659.
    The  McMurrays seek  relief under  section 6659(e),
    which allows for a waiver of "all or any part of the addition
    to tax provided by this section on a showing by  the taxpayer
    that there  was  a  reasonable basis  for  the  valuation  or
    adjusted  basis claimed on the return and that such claim was
    made  in good faith."   While we have  already concluded that
    the  McMurrays acted  in reasonable  reliance on  the Donovon
    appraisal, the  inquiry does  not end there,  because section
    6659(f)(2)  prohibits a  penalty waiver  unless "the  claimed
    value of the property was based on a qualified appraisal made
    by  a qualified  appraiser," and,  "in addition  to obtaining
    12.  The assessed  penalty is 30 percent  of the underpayment
    attributable to the valuation overstatement.
    -16-
    16
    such   an  appraisal,   the  taxpayer   made  a   good  faith
    investigation  of the value of the contributed property."  On
    appeal, the McMurrays do  not address section 6659(f)(2), nor
    does  our  review  of  the  record  indicate  any  additional
    investigation  by  the  McMurrays   into  the  value  of  the
    property.  Thus, we affirm the imposition of  penalties under
    section 6659.
    III.
    Conclusion
    The  tax  court's  decision  with  respect  to  the
    Commissioner's deficiency determination and additions  to tax
    under I.R.C.   6659  is affirmed.  The decision  with respect
    affirmed
    to  the  negligence  penalties  under  I.R.C.     6653(a)  is
    reversed.   This  case  is remanded  to  the Tax  Court  with
    reversed
    instructions to enter a decision in accordance herewith.
    -17-
    17