- 17 -
to accrue on the due date of the return for such tax and
continues to accrue, compounding daily, until payment is made.
See secs. 6601(a), 6622(a).
This Court may order an abatement of interest only if there
is an abuse of discretion by the Commissioner in failing to abate
interest. See sec. 6404(i), formerly sec. 6404(g). In order to
demonstrate an abuse of discretion, a taxpayer must prove that
the Commissioner exercised his discretion arbitrarily,
capriciously, or without sound basis in fact or law. See Rule
142(a); Lee v. Commissioner, 113 T.C. 145, 149 (1999); Woodral v.
Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 23 (1999).
The Commissioner has the authority to abate, in whole or in
part, an assessment of interest on a payment of income tax to the
extent that an error or delay in such payment is attributable to
an officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
acting in his or her official capacity, being erroneous or
dilatory in performing a ministerial act. See sec.
6404(e)(1)(B).11 An error or delay by the Commissioner can be
taken into account only: (1) If it occurs after the Commissioner
11 Sec. 6404(e) was amended in 1996 by TBOR 2 sec. 301, 110
Stat. 1457 (1996), to permit the Commissioner to abate interest
with respect to an “unreasonable” error or delay resulting from
“managerial” or ministerial acts. The amendment applies to
interest accruing with respect to deficiencies or payments for
taxable years beginning after July 30, 1996; accordingly, the
amendment is inapplicable in the present case. See Woodral v.
Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 25 n.8 (1999).
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