- 7 -
1989 amended return, petitioner reported $41,852.64 as his tax
liability for 1989; and (3) on the 1990 return, petitioner
reported $5,725 as his tax liability for 1990. Petitioner argues
that, because he showed the correct amount of tax imposed under
subtitle A on his 1989 amended return and 1990 return, there is
no underpayment of tax in this case.
An "underpayment" is the amount by which the tax imposed
exceeds the excess of the sum of the amount shown as the tax by
the taxpayer on his return, plus amounts not so shown that were
previously assessed (or collected without assessment), over the
amount of rebates made. See sec. 6664(a). In making this
computation, "the amount shown as the tax by the taxpayer on his
return" is reduced by the excess of:
(i) The amounts shown by the taxpayer on his
return as credits for tax withheld under section 31
(relating to tax withheld on wages) * * * over
(ii) The amounts actually withheld, * * * with
respect to a taxable year before the return is filed
for such taxable year. [Sec. 1.6664-2(c)(1)(i) and
(ii), Income Tax Regs.]
Section 1.6664-2, Income Tax Regs.,4 takes into
consideration the situation in which a taxpayer overstates the
4 We note that while the regulation was not issued until
after petitioner filed the tax returns at issue in the case at
bar, it does govern the definition of an underpayment with
respect to respondent's penalty determination herein as secs.
1.6664-1 through 1.6664-4, Income Tax Regs., apply to returns,
the due date of which is after Dec. 31, 1989. See sec. 7805(b);
Rice v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-65; sec. 1.6664-1(b),
Income Tax Regs.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011