Robert A. and Nanci M. Spurgin - Page 19




                                       - 19 -                                         
          other applicable Federal or State law, is not a ministerial act.            
          See sec. 301.6404-2T(b)(1), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs.,               
          supra.  The mere passage of time does not establish error or                
          delay in performing a ministerial act.  Scott v. Commissioner,              
          T.C. Memo. 2000-369; Hawksley v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-             
          354.                                                                        
               In their petition, petitioners request that “all interest              
          associated with this tax year” be abated.13  However, at trial              
          and on brief, petitioners narrowed the scope of their request,              
          identifying a specific period of time over which interest should            
          be abated; namely, the period from the date on which the first              
          offer in compromise was submitted (September 19, 1994) to the               
          date on which petitioners first learned of the local standards              
          for housing and utilities (February 12, 1997).  We observe that             
          the September 19, 1994, date is after the date on which                     
          respondent first contacted petitioners in writing with respect to           
          their unpaid tax liability for 1993.  See sec. 6404(e)(1).                  


               13  Sec. 6404(e) requires not only that a taxpayer identify            
          an error or delay caused by a ministerial act on the                        
          Commissioner’s part, but also identify a specific period of time            
          over which interest should be abated as a result of such error or           
          delay.  See Donovan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-220.  In the           
          petition, petitioners did not focus on this correlation between             
          the error or delay attributable to a ministerial act on                     
          respondent’s part and a specific period of time; rather,                    
          petitioners essentially requested that all interest with respect            
          to the taxable year 1993 be abated.  Such request is, in effect,            
          a request for an exemption from interest, rather than a request             
          for an abatement of interest.  However, the scope of such request           
          is beyond that contemplated by the statute.  See id.                        





Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011