- 21 -
pursuant to respondent’s offer to do so); (2) executing the form
of decision (containing the stipulation against an award of
costs, which required the Decision to be subsequently vacated);
and (3) filing the Motion in Limine (which was not meritorious).
We therefore hold that petitioner is not entitled to an award of
costs with respect to the portion of the court proceeding that
was protracted because of these matters. See sec. 7430(b)(3).
D. The Amount of Reasonable Costs
Mr. Gardner submitted various statements detailing costs and
expenses with respect to representing petitioner in both the
administrative and court proceedings. Those statements indicate
that Mr. Gardner’s hourly rate was $175.
Absent special factors, an award relating to attorney’s fees
incurred in calendar year 1999 after January 18 of that year is
$130 per hour and incurred in calendar years 2000 and 2001 is
$140 per hour. See sec. 7430(c)(1)(B)(iii); O’Bryon v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-379; Rev. Proc. 2001-13, 2001-3
I.R.B. 337, 341; Rev. Proc. 99-42, 1999-2 C.B. 568, 572; Rev.
Proc. 98-61, 1998-2 C.B. 811, 816. In view of the noncomplex
nature of the substantive issues presented by the notice of
deficiency (i.e., filing status, dependency exemptions, earned
income credit), and further in view of the fact that those issues
were conceded by respondent in the no-change letter before Mr.
Gardner was even retained, we find that no special factor
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011