- 9 - On May 15, 1999, respondent’s trial counsel requested petitioners’ counsel to provide complete copies of portions of the transaction documents that previously had not been provided to respondent’s representatives. On June 3, 1999, respondent rejected petitioners’ qualified offer. On June 16, 1999, the trial of the underlying substantive tax issues in these consolidated cases was held in San Francisco, California. On June 21, 2000, we filed our Memorandum Opinion in Haas & Associates Accountancy Corp. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000- 183, and we held as follows: (1) The $190,000 paid by Haas in connection with the separation of the accounting practice and a covenant not to compete was amortizable as an ordinary business expense deduction over 3 years as claimed by petitioners on their respective Federal income tax returns; (2) The $63,500 paid by Haas allegedly for consulting services represented a nondeductible startup expense that required capitalization; and (3) Because petitioners prevailed entirely on the treatment of the $190,000 and because petitioners had a reasonable basis for their claimed deduction for the $63,500 relating to the consulting services, no accuracy-related penalties were imposed on petitioners in connection with the above Federal income tax returns that petitioners had filed. In their motion for litigation costs, petitioners seek the recovery of the following fees and costs incurred after thePage: 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