- 6 -
windfall profit taxes which are apparently not subject to an
existing separate notice of deficiency. See Logan v.
Commissioner, 86 T.C. 1222, 1225-1230 (1986). In this
connection, we note that petitioners have offered no explanation
which would indicate how any windfall profit taxes for earlier
years would affect our determination of the taxes owed in respect
of the years before us.
(5) They appear to be asking us to decide that they should
not be considered in the category of producer for purposes of the
windfall profit tax; that issue has previously been decided
against them for the years 1980 through 1984 based upon the same
documents relating to their arrangement with Shell as are
involved herein. Muldavin v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-481,
affd. without published opinion 977 F.2d 582 (6th Cir. 1992). As
far as we can determine, there were no changes between facts or
law applicable to that case and those applicable herein with the
result that petitioners would be collaterally estopped from
relitigating the "producer" issue even if it were assumed to be
within our jurisdiction. Commissioner v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591
(1948).
(6) They devote a considerable portion of their brief to
asserting that there are facts relating to the windfall profit
3(...continued)
[Emphasis added.]
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011