Tan Dang & Ke T. Chaw Dang v. Commissioner - Page 5




                                        - 5 -                                         
               1.  Exhaust administrative remedies.  Sec. 7430(b)(1).                 
          Respondent concedes that petitioners meet this requirement.                 
               2.  Substantially prevail with respect to the amount in                
          controversy.  Sec. 7430(c)(4)(A)(i)(I).  Respondent concedes that           
          petitioners substantially prevailed.                                        
               3.  Be an individual whose net worth did not exceed $2                 
          million when the petition was filed.  Sec. 7430(c)(4)(A)(ii); 28            
          U.S.C. sec. 2412(d)(2)(B) (1988).  Petitioners meet this                    
          requirement.                                                                
               4.  Not unreasonably protract the proceedings.  Sec.                   
          7430(b)(3).  Respondent concedes that petitioners meet this                 
          requirement.                                                                
               5.  Establish that the amount of costs and attorney’s fees             
          claimed are reasonable.  Sec. 7430(a), (c)(1).  Respondent                  
          concedes that the number of attorney hours and other costs                  
          claimed by petitioners are reasonable.                                      
               The taxpayer is not entitled to an award for reasonable                
          litigation costs if the Commissioner shows that the position of             
          the United States in the proceeding was substantially justified.            
          Sec. 7430(c)(4)(B)(i).                                                      
          B.   Whether Respondent’s Position Was Substantially Justified              
               1.   Background                                                        
               The parties dispute whether respondent’s position in the               
          underlying proceeding was substantially justified.                          






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011