Hugh D. and Nancy L. Sims - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                         
          Our jurisdiction is limited, however, to deciding whether                   
          respondent abused his discretion by refusing to abate interest.             
          See sec. 6404(g)(1).  As we evaluate respondent’s exercise of               
          discretion, we are mindful that Congress intended for respondent            
          to abate interest under section 6404(e) “where failure to abate             
          interest would be widely perceived as grossly unfair”, but that             
          the abatement provision should not “be used routinely to avoid              
          payment of interest”.  H. Rept. 99-426, at 844 (1985), 1986-3               
          C.B. (Vol. 2) 1, 844; S. Rept. 99-313, at 208 (1986), 1986-3 C.B.           
          (Vol. 3) 1, 208; see also Krugman v. Commissioner, supra.                   
               In this case, petitioners object to the assessment of                  
          interest against them because they made a good faith effort to              
          comply with the law as it existed when their 1993 return was                
          filed.  They made full disclosure of their position and the legal           
          and factual basis for it on their 1993 return, even attaching               
          copies of the case on which they relied.  They contend that the             
          assessment of interest against them is unfair and, therefore,               
          should be abated.                                                           
               Although we understand petitioners’ frustration and                    
          empathize with their position, petitioners have not argued that             
          any employee of respondent erred in performing a ministerial act            
          or delayed performing a ministerial act as required by section              
          6404(e)(1).  An examination of the facts in this case reveals               
          there was no such error.  The term “ministerial act” is defined             






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011