Lowell L. and Marilyn A. Robertson - Page 3




                                        - 3 -                                         
             and (2) and 6661 and for increased interest under section                
             6621(c).                                                                 
                  Following the release of Robertson I, the Court and                 
             counsel for the parties in 47 other cases that were filed                
             by the other unitholders of the Roscrea Trust and by                     
             petitioners for the years 1982, 1983, and 1985 agreed that               
             petitioners and the other unitholders of the Trust were                  
             bound by Robertson I as to the losses claimed from the                   
             Trust, a determination made at the entity level, but that                
             the other unitholders were not bound by Robertson I as to                
             a unitholder's liability for the additions to tax under                  
             sections 6653 and 6661, a determination made at the unit-                
             holder level.  See Merino v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-              
             385; Webb v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-556, remanded                 
             without published opinion 17 F.3d 398 (9th Cir. 1994).                   
             The other unitholders advised the Court that they wished                 
             to present evidence on the issue of their liability for                  
             the additions to tax under sections 6653 and 6661 but                    
             represented that such evidence would not be taxpayer                     
             specific.  After discussions, the parties in each of                     
             the related cases agreed to be bound by the result in                    
             the instant case, and the Court reopened the record and set              
             it for further trial to permit petitioners to introduce                  








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011