- 9 -
Commissioner, supra at 442. Respondent's position in the
proceeding before this Court was established on November 20,
1998, the date respondent filed the answer. In the present case,
it is not necessary to analyze respondent’s position separately,
because respondent took the same position on each issue in both
the notice of deficiency and the answer. See Swanson v.
Commissioner, 106 T.C. 76, 87 (1996).
We now consider whether respondent's position was
substantially justified. We analyze respondent's position in the
context of the circumstances that caused respondent to take that
position and the manner in which respondent maintained that
position. See Wasie v. Commissioner, supra at 969; Kahn-Langer
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-527; Amann v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1993-542, affd. without published opinion 40 F.3d 1235 (1st
Cir. 1994). We may also consider: (1) Whether the Government
used the costs and expenses of litigation against its position to
extract concessions from the taxpayer that were not justified
under the circumstances of the case; (2) whether the Government
pursued the litigation against the taxpayer for purposes of
harassment or embarrassment, or out of political motivation; and
(3) such other factors as the Court finds relevant. See Sher v.
Commissioner, 89 T.C. 79, 85 (1987), affd. 861 F.2d 131 (5th Cir.
1988).
Our analysis of what caused respondent to take a position
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011