- 13 -
part and remanding T.C. Memo. 1992-382.8 Additionally, we look
at the manner in which respondent maintained that position.
Wasie v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 962, 969 (1986); Kahn-Langer v.
Commissioner, supra; Amann v. Commissioner, supra. Factors which
may be considered include:
(1) whether the government used the costs and expenses
of litigation against its position to extract
concessions from the taxpayer that were not justified
under the circumstances of the case, (2) whether the
government pursued the litigation against the taxpayer
for purposes of harassment or embarrassment, or out of
political motivation, and (3) such other factors as the
Court finds relevant. [citing H. Rept. 97-404, at 12
(1981), Sher v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 79, 85 (1987),
affd. 861 F.2d 131 (5th Cir. 1988).]
Our analysis of what caused respondent to take that position
may include events preceding the date the notices of deficiency
were issued. Lennox v. Commissioner, supra; Uddo v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-276; Williford v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 1994-135. The reasonableness of respondent's position
and conduct necessarily requires considering what respondent knew
at the time. Rutana v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1329, 1334 (1987);
DeVenney v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 927, 930 (1985); Triplett v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-313. We ask ourselves "whether
* * * [the Commissioner] knew or should have known that [the
Commissioner's] position was invalid at the onset." Estate of
8 Venue for appeal in these cases lies to the Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Accordingly, precedent from that
jurisdiction controls our analysis of the issues. Golsen v.
Commissioner, 54 T.C. 742, 757 (1970), affd. 445 F.2d 985 (10th
Cir. 1971).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011