- 88 -
substantial understatement of tax penalties under section 6661
and the negligence additions to tax under section 6653(a)(1) and
(2); (3) taxpayer concession of the section 6659 addition to tax
for valuation overstatement and the increased rate of interest
under section 6621; and (4) execution of a closing agreement
(Form 906) stating the settlement and resolving the entire matter
for all years.32 Petitioners assert that the Plastics Recycling
project settlement offer was extended to them, but they do not
claim to have accepted the offer timely, so they effectively
rejected it.33
32 Except as discussed in infra note 33, the records do not
include a settlement offer to petitioners. However, petitioners
in each case have attached to their motion for decision a copy of
a settlement offer to another taxpayer with respect to a plastics
recycling case, and respondent has not disputed the accuracy of
the statement of the plastics recycling settlement offer.
33 In each of their motions for decision, petitioners state,
"Respondent formulated a standard settlement position which was
extended to all taxpayers having docketed or non-docketed cases
in the plastics recycling group, including Petitioner." (Emphasis
added.)
In docket Nos. 21518-88 (Sann) and 21519-88 (Addington),
respondent attached to the respective objections to petitioners'
motion for leave a copy of a letter extending the settlement
offer to Sann and Addington. The letters, dated December 6,
1988, were addressed to counsel for Sann and Addington at the
time, Stephen D. Gardner. Addington and the Sanns have not
disputed the accuracy of the copies of the settlement offers in
docket Nos. 21518-88 and 21519-88.
Respondent also attached to those same objections a copy of
the respective reply letters. Dated December 23, 1988, the reply
letters reject the offers of settlement but indicate a
willingness to be bound by a final decision in the Provizer case,
but only if the proposed form of stipulation is modified so as
not to bind them to a settlement, inter alia. Addington and the
Sanns have not disputed the accuracy of the copies of the reply
letters.
Page: Previous 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011