- 75 - project settlement offer was extended to them, but they do not claim to have accepted the offer timely, so they effectively rejected it. In December 1988, the Miller cases were disposed of by settlement agreement between the taxpayers and respondent.8 This Court entered decisions based upon those settlements on December 22, 1988. The settlement provided that the taxpayers in the Miller cases were liable for the addition to tax under section 6659 for valuation overstatement, but not for the additions to tax under sections 6661 and 6653(a). The increased interest under section 6621(c), premised solely upon Miller's interest in the recyclers for the taxable years at issue, was not applicable because Miller made payments prior to December 31, 1984, so no interest accrued after that time. Respondent did not notify petitioners or any other taxpayers of the disposition of the Miller cases. Estate of Satin v. Commissioner, supra; Fisher v. Commissioner, supra. Petitioners argue that they are similarly situated to Miller, the taxpayer in the Miller cases, and that pursuant to the principle of "equality" they are therefore entitled to the same settlement agreement executed by respondent and Miller in 8 Although it is not otherwise a part of the record in these cases, respondent attached copies of the Miller closing agreement and disclosure waiver to her objection to petitioners' motion for leave, and petitioners do not dispute the accuracy of the document.Page: Previous 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011