- 13 -
Lastly, we emphasize that the credible factual evidence
submitted in connection with petitioners’ motions establishes
that petitioners and all other investors in the Elektra
Hemisphere tax shelters were treated consistently by respondent
and were given the same opportunity to settle their tax disputes
with respondent on the same terms and with the same time
deadlines. The disposition of cases involved in the Elektra
Hemisphere tax shelters followed specific time frames, and each
different settlement position of respondent, which appears to
have been adequately communicated to all investors in the Elektra
Hemisphere tax shelters, was based on the "hazards of litigation"
as perceived by respondent at a particular point in time.
In years after the Krause v. Commissioner, supra, test case
opinion was filed, petitioners herein finally chose to agree to
respondent’s pending settlement offer, at which time the only
available settlement position available to investors in the
Elektra Hemisphere tax shelters was that which was accepted by
petitioners and which was reflected in the decisions that were
entered (namely, the no-cash settlements).
Petitioners’ arguments and evidence fail to establish any
"scheme of secrecy" regarding the availability of respondent’s
various settlement positions that were available to taxpayers who
had invested in the Elektra Hemisphere tax shelters.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011