- 8 - imposition against them of increased interest would violate due process of law.1 See sec. 301.6621-2T, A-4, Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 49 Fed. Reg. 50392 (Dec. 28, 1984). As we explained in Krause v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. at 180, imposition of increased interest under section 6621(c), and its predecessor section 6621(d), is largely mechanical. Section 6621(c) provides an increased rate of interest for substantial underpayments attributable to tax-motivated transactions. Substantial underpayments are defined as underpayments in excess of $1,000. By legislative regulation, see sec. 6621(c)(3)(B), among the types of transactions that are considered to be tax- motivated transactions within the meaning of section 6621(c) are those with respect to which related tax deductions are disallowed under section 183 for lack of profit objective. See Rybak v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 524, 568 (1988); sec. 301.6621-2T, A-4(1), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 49 Fed. Reg. 50392 (Dec. 28, 1984). We note that in 1986, in amending section 6621(c) to include sham transactions among the specified types of transactions that trigger increased interest, congressional reports expressly commented with approval on the temporary legislative regulations under section 6621(c) that included lack of profit motive or 1 As of June 30, 1990, respondent asserts approximately $250,000 of increased interest under sec. 6621(c) and in excess of $2 million of regular interest under sec. 6621(a).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011