Michael W. Braun - Page 15

                                       - 15 -                                         
          See H. Rept. 99-426, supra at 844, 1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 2) at 844;             
          S. Rept. 99-313, supra at 208, 1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 3) at 208.                 
          3.   Whether Petitioner Would Have Paid the Tax Liability Earlier           
               but for Respondent’s Error                                             
               Finally, no abatement is warranted where, notwithstanding a            
          mistake by the Commissioner, no earlier payment would have been             
          made.  See Wright v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-69, affd. 125            
          Fed. Appx. 547 (5th Cir. 2005); see also Spurgin v. Commissioner,           
          T.C. Memo. 2001-290; Bo v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-150.               
          Interest accruing merely because a taxpayer fails to pay the                
          assessed tax is not subject to abatement under section 6404(e).             
          Ahmaogak v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-238; Donovan v.                   
          Commissioner, supra; Douponce v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-             
          398.  Petitioner has not demonstrated that the Brauns would have            
          paid their tax liabilities for 1994 and 1997 earlier but for                
          respondent’s actions.                                                       
          4.   Conclusion                                                             
               We recognize that petitioner underwent severe physical                 
          trauma, as well as job loss before and after his injury, all of             
          which contributed to the Brauns’ failing to file or pay their               
          income tax timely for 1994 or 1997.  Our jurisdiction is limited,           
          however, to determining whether respondent abused his discretion            
          in not abating interest.                                                    
               From our review of the record, petitioner has not shown that           
          respondent was dilatory in performing a ministerial or managerial           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011