The Brinson Company-Midwest, Inc., et al - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
          administrative and litigation costs.  To be a prevailing party              
          under section 7430(c)(4), the party seeking such award must: (1)            
          Establish that the position of the United States in the                     
          proceeding was not substantially justified, sec. 7430(c)                    
          (4)(A)(i); (2) substantially prevail with respect to the amount             
          in controversy, or have substantially prevailed with respect to             
          the most significant issue or set of issues presented, sec.                 
          7430(c)(4)(A)(ii); and (3) establish that the party had the                 
          requisite net worth at the time the proceeding was commenced,               
          sec. 7430(c)(4)(A)(iii).                                                    
               Additionally, a judgment for administrative and litigation             
          costs will not be awarded under section 7430(a) unless the Court            
          determines: (1) That the prevailing party has exhausted the                 
          administrative remedies available within the Internal Revenue               
          Service (Service), sec. 7430(b)(1); and (2) that the prevailing             
          party has not unreasonably protracted the Court proceeding, sec.            
          7430(b)(4).  See Bragg v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 715, 717 (1994);           
          Polyco, Inc. v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 963, 966-967 (1988).                  
               Respondent agrees that petitioners substantially prevailed             
          in the underlying actions, met the net worth requirement, have              
          not unreasonably protracted the Court proceeding, and have                  
          exhausted their administrative remedies.  Thus, we focus our                
          analysis on considering whether respondent's position was                   
          substantially justified.                                                    






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

Last modified: May 25, 2011