Casey A. Roginiel - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
          administrative remedies, (3) did not unreasonably protract the              
          administrative or judicial proceeding, and (4) claimed reasonable           
          litigation costs.  Sec. 7430(a), (b)(1), (3), (c).  These                   
          requirements are conjunctive.  Minahan v. Commissioner, 88 T.C.             
          492, 497 (1987).  Except as provided in section 7430(c)(4)(B),              
          petitioner bears the burden of proving that he meets each of the            
          requirements of section 7430.  Rule 232(e).                                 
               To be a prevailing party, a taxpayer must:  (1)                        
          Substantially prevail with respect to either the amount in                  
          controversy or the most significant issue or set of issues                  
          presented, and (2) meet certain net worth requirements.  Sec.               
          7430(c)(4)(A)(i) and (ii).  However, 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).                        
               Respondent concedes that petitioner substantially prevailed            
          and meets the net worth requirements.  Respondent argues,                   
          however, that petitioner is not the prevailing party because                
          respondent was substantially justified in maintaining his                   
          position in the administrative and judicial proceedings.                    
          Respondent also argues that petitioner did not exhaust all                  
          administrative remedies, that petitioner unreasonably protracted            
          the proceedings, and that the fees requested are unreasonable.              
               We focus first on whether petitioner exhausted all available           






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

Last modified: May 25, 2011