- 6 -
Based on our review of section 6404(e) and the
Code sections it references, we hold that the
Commissioner lacks the authority to abate assessments
of interest on employment taxes under section 6404(e).
As the Commissioner has no authority to abate
assessments of interest on employment taxes under
section 6404(e), the Commissioner could not have
committed an abuse of discretion--a person with no
discretion simply cannot abuse it. [Id.]
Petitioner does not distinguish this case from Woodral. Rather,
she asks us to overrule a recent decision of this Court. We
decline to do so.
Petitioner contends that Woodral “intermingled and combined
the wording of Subsection (A) and (B)” and “tampered with the
clear and unambiguous language” of section 6404(e)(1)(A) in
contravention of Exxon v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 721 (1994).
“Courts are forbidden to tamper with the plain meaning of the
words employed unless they are clearly ambiguous or nonsensical.”
Id. at 727. Petitioner also argues that section 6404 was enacted
to provide taxpayer relief and that there is absolutely no reason
to believe that Congress intended to limit section 6404(e)(1)(A)
as set forth in Woodral.
As we stated in Woodral, if a statute is clear, we focus on
the language of the statute in determining congressional intent.
Particular phrases are construed in consideration of the overall
statutory scheme. See Woodral v. Commissioner, supra at 22.
“Deficiency” is a term of art, and, according to section 6211,
deficiency does not deal with the realm of employment taxes.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011