Raymond P. Corkrey and Megan B. Flom-Corkrey - Page 11




                                       - 11 -                                         
          petitioner and Mr. Vecchio to a Congressman, processed                      
          petitioner's penalty abatement.                                             
               On July 29, 1997, petitioners filed a claim for                        
          administrative costs with respect to petitioner's 1987 and 1988             
          taxable years.  The claimed administrative costs for petitioner's           
          attorney cover a period from December 12, 1996 through June 2,              
          1997, and for his accountant from September 30, 1996 through                
          April 30, 1997.  On August 11, 1997, the Service denied the claim           
          for administrative costs.4                                                  
                                       OPINION                                        
               Petitioners seek administrative costs pursuant to section              
          7430.  Originally, section 7430 only authorized the Court to                
          award reasonable litigation costs.  See Tax Equity & Fiscal                 
          Responsibility Act of 1982, Pub. L. 97-248, sec. 292, 96 Stat.              
          324, 572-574; Gustafson v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 85, 87 (1991).             
          Congress, however, broadened the scope of section 7430 by                   
          amending section 6239 of subtitle J (the "Omnibus Taxpayer Bill             
          of Rights") of the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of               
          1988 (TAMRA), Pub. L. 100-647, 102 Stat. 3342, 3743-3746.  In               
          proceedings commenced after November 10, 1988, the Court is                 

          4    After petitioners filed their petition with the Court,                 
          respondent moved to dismiss petitioner Megan B. Flom-Corkrey for            
          lack of jurisdiction.  However, respondent was subsequently                 
          permitted to withdraw the motion to dismiss when petitioners                
          demonstrated that respondent had filed liens against petitioners'           
          joint bank accounts and applied petitioners' joint refunds                  
          against petitioner's liabilities.                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011