Steven Wesley Noe - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
               Section 6654(a) imposes an addition to tax equal to the                
          amount of the underpayment multiplied by the underpayment rate              
          established under section 6621 for the period of the                        
          underpayment.  The addition to tax under section 6654(a) is                 
          mandatory unless petitioner can prove that he complies with one             
          of the exceptions contained in section 6654(e).  See Baldwin v.             
          Commissioner, 84 T.C. 859, 871 (1985); Grosshandler v.                      
          Commissioner, 75 T.C. 1, 20-21 (1980).  Petitioner did not                  
          introduce evidence on this issue, and we sustain respondent's               
          determination of the addition to tax under section 6654.                    
               Section 6673(a)(1) allows this Court to award a penalty not            
          in excess of $25,000 when proceedings have been instituted or               
          maintained primarily for delay, or where the taxpayer's position            
          is frivolous or groundless; i.e., it is contrary to established             
          law and unsupported by a reasoned, colorable argument for a                 
          change in the law.  See Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68, 71            
          (7th Cir. 1986); Kish v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-16;                  
          Talmage v. Commissioner, supra.  In our opinion, such is the case           
          here, and we believe that a penalty is appropriate.  The                    
          positions argued by petitioner are frivolous and wholly without             
          merit.  Moreover, we previously rejected petitioner's frivolous             
          arguments when he raised them by motion for summary judgment.               
          Accordingly, petitioner was fully warned of our opinion with                








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011