- 10 -
that respondent was not precluded from making different
adjustments for 1981, a year not covered by the prior settlement
for the later TEFRA years and not covered by the TEFRA settlement
procedures. See also Gridley v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-
210, in which we noted that the TEFRA settlement procedures did
not apply to pre-TEFRA years.
In Fisher v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-434, a duty on
respondent to extend similar settlements was found to exist as to
all taxpayers, but such duty was based not on any statutory
requirements of TEFRA but on express contractual agreements that
had been entered into by the taxpayers to be bound by results of
subsequent test cases, and we concluded that a corresponding duty
of disclosure was imposed on respondent to inform all taxpayers
as to the outcome of the test cases. In Fisher, when some of the
test cases were settled, other taxpayers in the group of related
cases had a contractual right to be informed of the settlement
and to settle their cases on the same basis. Fisher is
distinguishable from the facts of the instant cases.
Absent proof that a taxpayer has been singled out for
disparate treatment based on impermissible considerations such as
race or religion, and absent contractual agreements to the
contrary, respondent is not required to offer the same settlement
terms to similarly situated taxpayers. Norfolk S. Corp. v.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011