- 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 positionPage: 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