- 4 - Petitioner failed to do so. Consequently, we sustain respondent's deficiency determination. Respondent filed a motion seeking to impose a penalty on petitioner pursuant to section 6673(a). Section 6673(a)(1) authorizes the Court to require a taxpayer to pay to the United States a penalty up to $25,000 whenever it appears that proceedings in this Court have been instituted or maintained by the taxpayer primarily for delay, or that the taxpayer's position in such proceeding is frivolous or groundless. A taxpayer's position is frivolous or groundless "if it is contrary to established law and unsupported by a reasoned, colorable argument for change in the law." Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68, 71 (7th Cir. 1986). We find that petitioner instituted this proceeding primarily for delay and maintained a frivolous and groundless position. Petitioner was made aware of the frivolous and groundless nature of his arguments. He failed to heed these warnings and allowed his case to proceed. Petitioner's insistence on pursuing his fruitless argument has consumed the time and effort of both this Court and the Commissioner that could have otherwise been devoted to resolving bona fide claims of other taxpayers. See Cook v. Spillman, 806 F.2d 948 (9th Cir. 1986). Accordingly, we shall grant respondent's motion for an award of a penalty under section 6673 and require petitioner to pay a penalty to the United States in the amount of $1,000, although we advise petitioner that thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011