- 13 -
results obtained, and the customary fees and awards in other
cases should not be considered for the purpose of determining
whether an increased award is warranted. Pierce v. Underwood,
supra at 573; Cozean v. Commissioner, supra; see also sec.
301.7430-4(b)(3)(iii)(B), Proced. & Admin. Regs. Likewise, it is
not a special factor if hourly rates for all lawyers in the
relevant city or area exceed $75. Pierce v. Underwood, supra at
571-572; Powers v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. at 489.
General expertise in tax law in itself is not a special
factor warranting a fee award in excess of $75 per hour under
section 7430. Huffman v. Commissioner, 978 F.2d at 1150; Powers
v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. at 489. Depending on the facts and
circumstances of the case, however, we may find that a tax
attorney had a special skill and expertise needful for the
litigation in question. Powers v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. at 489.
Although the issues presented in Lozon I may have required
petitioner to secure the services of a competent tax attorney,
this finding, standing alone, does not demonstrate the presence
of a special factor which would justify an increased award under
section 7430. See Powers v. Commissioner, 43 F.3d 172, 183 (5th
Cir. 1995), affg. in part and revg. in part T.C. Memo. 1993-125;
Cozean v. Commissioner, supra. Petitioners have failed to
establish that Mr. Owens possessed any nonlegal or technical
abilities apart from his expertise in tax law. See Powers v.
Commissioner, 43 F.3d at 183; Cozean v. Commissioner, supra.
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