- 11 -
into with other Jojoba partners because respondent improperly
failed to notify petitioners of those other settlement
agreements. Respondent contends that he did not act improperly
with regard to the offers of settlement to Jojoba partners and is
therefore not now obligated to extend to petitioners any offer of
settlement. We agree with respondent.
Section 6224(c)(2) provides:
If the Secretary enters into a settlement agreement
with any partner with respect to partnership items for
any partnership taxable year, the Secretary shall offer
to any other partner who so requests settlement terms
for the partnership taxable year which are consistent
with those contained in such settlement agreement
[consistent settlement offer]. * * *
Under section 6224(c)(2), respondent was under no obligation to
petitioners until (i) respondent entered into a settlement
agreement with another Jojoba partner for a partnership taxable
year at issue here, and (ii) petitioners requested an offer
consistent with the terms of that settlement agreement. The
parties do not dispute that respondent entered into settlement
agreements with other Jojoba partners for 1982, 1983, 1985, and
1986 in July or August 1991. The only remaining question is
whether petitioners properly requested a consistent settlement
offer.
Section 301.6224(c)-3T(c), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs.,
52 Fed. Reg. 6787 (Mar. 5, 1987), sets forth the proper time and
manner of requesting a consistent settlement. It provides that a
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