Brian G. Takaba - Page 15




                                       - 15 -                                         

                    the Tax Court, in its decision, may require the                   
                    taxpayer to pay to the United States a penalty not                
                    in excess of $25,000.                                             
                         (2) Counsel’s liability for excessive costs.                 
               –-Whenever it appears to the Tax Court that any                        
               attorney or other person admitted to practice before                   
               the Tax Court has multiplied the proceedings in any                    
               case unreasonably and vexatiously, the Tax Court may                   
               require--                                                              
                              (A) that such attorney or other person                  
                         pay personally the excess costs, expenses,                   
                         and attorneys’ fees reasonably incurred                      
                         because of such conduct * * *                                
          III.  Discussion                                                            
               A.  Section 6673(a)(1) Liability of Petitioner                         
               Respondent asks that we impose damages on petitioner under             
          section 6673(a)(1) because petitioner “filed and maintained this            
          action primarily for delay” and “his position * * * is frivolous            
          or groundless.”  Although disagreeing that he instituted or                 
          maintained these proceedings primarily for delay, petitioner                
          virtually concedes that his initial arguments are frivolous:                
          “Prior to Petitioner’s counsel’s entry, the Petitioner was                  
          maintaining several well known alleged ‘tax protester’ arguments            
          in reliance upon professional opinions dating back to 1995.”  We            
          agree that petitioner’s initial arguments are frivolous.  A                 
          taxpayer’s position is frivolous if it is contrary to established           
          law and unsupported by a reasoned, colorable argument for a                 
          change in the law.  E.g., Nis Family Trust v. Commissioner, 115             






Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011