Joseph D. Park and Mi Jung Park, et al. - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          that they meet each of the requirements of section 7430.  Rule              
          232(e).  Their failure to meet any one of the requirements of               
          section 7430 will preclude an award of costs.  Minahan v.                   
          Commissioner, 88 T.C. 492, 497 (1987).                                      
               Petitioners may recover litigation costs only if they meet             
          the net worth requirements referenced in 28 U.S.C. sec.                     
          2412(d)(1)(B).  Sec. 7430(c)(4)(A)(ii).  An individual’s net                
          worth must not exceed $2 million at the time of filing of the               
          petition to commence a civil proceeding.  28 U.S.C. sec.                    
          2412(d)(2)(B); Stieha v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 784, 790 (1987).             
          A motion for litigation cost requires “A statement that the                 
          moving party meets the net worth requirements, * * * which                  
          statement shall be supported by an affidavit executed by the                
          moving party”.  Rule 231(b)(4).                                             
               If a taxpayer, in a motion for litigation costs, fails to              
          sufficiently establish net worth, and the Commissioner challenges           
          whether the taxpayer has met the net worth requirements, the                
          taxpayer must provide additional evidence.  See Estate of Hubberd           
          v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 335, 341 (1992); Dixson Intl. Serv.                
          Corp. v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 708, 719 (1990); see also Johnson            
          v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-127 (holding that when a                   
          taxpayer submits only a statement, accompanied by an affidavit,             
          the Court is not “compelled to accept petitioners’                          
          unsubstantiated, conclusory, and self-serving assertion that they           






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011