- 69 -
purported reliance on the offering materials, Tucker, and Becker
was unreasonable. The record in these consolidated cases does
not establish an abuse of discretion on the part of respondent
but supports respondent's position. We hold that respondent's
refusal to waive the section 6659 addition to tax is not an abuse
of discretion. Petitioners are liable for the respective section
6659 additions to tax at the rate of 30 percent of the portions
of their underpayments attributable to valuation overstatements.
Respondent is sustained on this issue.
C. Petitioners' Motion For Leave To File Motion For Decision
Ordering Relief From the Negligence Penalty and the Penalty Rate
of Interest and To File Supporting Memorandum of Law
Long after the trial of these consolidated cases,
petitioners filed a Motion For Leave To File Motion For Decision
Ordering Relief From the Negligence Penalty and the Penalty Rate
of Interest and To File Supporting Memorandum of Law under Rule
50. Petitioners also lodged with the Court a motion for decision
seeking relief from the additions to tax for negligence and from
the increased rate of interest, with attachments, and a
memorandum in support of the motion. Respondent filed an
objection, with attachments, and a memorandum in support thereof,
and petitioners thereafter filed a reply memorandum. Petitioners
argue that they should be afforded the same settlement that was
reached between other taxpayers and the IRS in docket Nos. 10382-
86 and 10383-86, each of which was styled Miller v. Commissioner.
See Farrell v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-295 (denying a
Page: Previous 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011