- 16 -
the 1985 piggyback agreement does not require a final decision in
the test cases as a prerequisite for entry of decision in the
piggyback cases. Specifically, paragraph 4 of the 1985 piggyback
agreement provides for entry of decision in the piggyback cases
"when the decision in the TRIED CASE is entered."11 With this
distinction in mind, we note that petitioners' theory for
extension of the Thompson decision on the ground that the
Thompson decision is a final decision is inapposite with respect
to cases governed by the 1985 piggyback agreement. In any event,
as previously stated, whether we focus on the 1985 piggyback
agreement or on the 1986 piggyback agreement, our analysis of the
plain language of both agreements leads to the conclusion that it
is the Court's opinion in the test cases, as opposed to the
decision entered in any particular test case, that establishes
the standard for computations for entry of decision in the
piggyback cases.
11 Par. 4 of the 1985 piggyback agreement is akin to the
provision governing entry of decision at issue in Abatti v.
Commissioner, 86 T.C. 1319 (1986), affd. 859 F.2d 115 (9th Cir.
1988). In this regard, the parties could have moved for entry of
decision in the cases subject to the 1985 piggyback agreement
when decisions were first entered in the test cases in 1992.
However, in light of the subsequent decision of the Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in DuFresne v. Commissioner, 26
F.3d 105 (9th Cir. 1994), entry of decision in cases subject to
the 1985 piggyback agreement now must await entry of decision in
the test cases following this Court's resolution of the issues
raised by the Court of Appeals in its remand of the test cases.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011