- 33 -
Explanation was published on May 4, 1987, during the 100th
Congress. Thus, the General Explanation is not even
entitled to the respect it might otherwise be accorded if it
had been prepared for the Congress which enacted sec.
163(h).
8 See also Lawson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-286.
We conclude that there are several difficulties with the
foregoing analysis in our opinion in Redlark v. Commissioner, 106
T.C. at 44-46. For the following reasons, we would not agree
that the conference committee explanation has a “clear thrust”.
Firstly, interest ordinarily is imposed on underpayments or
overpayments, not on deficiencies. See, e.g., secs. 6601, 6611,
6621. There can be an income tax deficiency without an
underpayment.12 There can be an underpayment without an income
tax deficiency.13 In describing the amendments made by TRA 1986
sections 1511 (to sec. 6621, I.R.C. 1986) and 1512 (to sec. 6601,
I.R.C. 1986), the Joint Statement of Managers portion of the
conference committee report consistently refers to interest on
underpayments or overpayments of tax, and it does not refer to
interest on tax deficiencies. H. Conf. Rept. 99-841, at II-784
to II-785 (1986); 1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 4) at 784-785.
12 See, e.g., Lundy v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-278,
revd. 45 F.3d 856 (4th Cir. 1995), revd. 516 U.S. 235 (1996), in
which the parties agreed that the taxpayer had a $778 deficiency
even though the taxpayer’s withheld (and not refunded) income
taxes exceeded his total tax liability.
13 E.g., when a correct tax return is filed, but the
payments are less than the correctly stated liabilities.
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011