- 6 - respect to the tax; and (2) no significant aspect of such delay can be attributed to the taxpayer involved. Sec. 6404(e)(1).3 In accordance with the provisions of section 6404(i), a taxpayer whose claim for abatement under section 6404(e) has been denied may petition this Court for a determination whether the Commissioner’s failure to abate interest was an abuse of discretion. In this case petitioner seeks abatement of interest with respect to a Federal income tax liability assessed pursuant to amounts reported on her 1990 original and amended returns. Generally, the relief provided by section 6404 is not available under those circumstances. As noted in the legislative history of that section, “if a taxpayer files a return but does not pay the taxes due, * * * [section 6404] would not permit abatement of this interest regardless of how long the IRS took to contact the taxpayer and request payment.” S. Rept. 99-313 (1985), 1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 3) 1, 208; see also Smith v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-1. Moreover, petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the 3 In 1996, sec. 6404(e) was amended by sec. 301 of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights 2, Pub. L. 104-168, 110 Stat. 1457 (1996), to permit the Secretary to abate interest with respect to “unreasonable” error or delay resulting from “managerial” and ministerial acts. This amendment, however, applies to interest accruing with respect to deficiencies or payments for tax years beginning after July 30, 1996. This case involves petitioner’s 1990 tax year; therefore, the amendment is inapplicable here. Woodral v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 25 n.8 (1999).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011