Case Name: Steven YARI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-10-13
Citations: 669 F. App'x 489
Docket Number: No. 14-73914
Parties: Steven YARI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: REINHARDT, FERNANDEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 669
Pages: 489–489

Head Matter:
Steven YARI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 14-73914
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted October 3, 2016 Pasadena, California
Filed October 13, 2016
Steven Ray Mather, Mather Law Corporation, Beverly Hills, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant
Jonathan S. Cohen, Attorney, Douglas Campbell Rennie, Attorney, William J. Wilkins, Chief Counsel, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Robert R. Di Trolio, Esquire, Clerk, U.S. Tax Court, Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellee
Before: REINHARDT, FERNANDEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Steven Yari appeals the decision of the Tax Court, which upheld the Commissioner of Internal Revenue's determination of the penalty which resulted from Yari's failure to disclose a reportable listed transaction when he filed his 2004 income tax return. See 26 U.S.C. § 6707A(a), (b)(2)(A), (c). We affirm.
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). As with appeals from the district courts, we review issues of law de novo, but review findings of fact for clear error. See Meruelo v. Comm'r, 691 F.3d 1108, 1114 (9th Cir. 2012); Estate of Ashman v. Comm'r, 231 F.3d 541, 542 (9th Cir. 2000).
We agree with the Tax Court that the Commissioner properly based his calculation of the penalty upon the return signed by Yari on October 17, 2005, rather than upon amendments to that return, which were prepared years later. See Yari, 143 T.C. at 163-69. We, therefore, affirm the Tax Court for the reasons stated in its comprehensive decision. Id. at 157-69.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
. Yari v. Comm'r, 143 T.C. 157 (2014).