- 5 -
we ordered the portion of the amended petition that seeks an
abatement of penalties be stricken for lack of jurisdiction.4
Discussion
Respondent argues (1) to the extent that petitioners' claim
for abatement of interest arises under section 6404(a), the Court
lacks jurisdiction to review respondent's denial of that claim,
(2) if the Court concludes that it has jurisdiction over
petitioners' claim under section 6404(a), there was no abuse of
discretion under section 6404(a) because the assessments of
interest were not excessive in amount, assessed after the
expiration of the period of limitations, or erroneously or
illegally assessed, and (3) there was no abuse of discretion
under section 6404(e) because the Commissioner is not authorized
under section 6404(e)(1) to abate interest assessed with respect
to employment taxes. Petitioners contend that the Court has
jurisdiction pursuant to section 6404(g), and the Commissioner
committed an abuse of discretion by failing to abate the interest
under either section 6404(a) or (e).
In construing section 6404, our task is to give effect to
the intent of Congress. We begin with the statutory language,
which is the most persuasive evidence of the statutory purpose.
United States v. American Trucking Associations, Inc., 310 U.S.
4 As we stated in our order dated Apr. 9, 1998, the Court
lacks jurisdiction to review the Commissioner's failure to abate
penalties. Sec. 6404(g) only provides the Court jurisdiction to
review the failure to abate interest, and sec. 7436 does not
provide the Court with jurisdiction because this case does not
involve a redetermination of employment status.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011