Michael W. Bethea - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
          raised in the assignments of error shall be deemed conceded.  See           
          Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 183, 185-186 (2001); Goza v.             
          Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 183 (2000).  Accordingly, the Court             
          concludes that respondent’s determination to proceed with                   
          collection of petitioner’s tax liabilities was not an abuse of              
          discretion.                                                                 
          II.  Section 6673 Penalty                                                   
               Section 6673(a)(1) authorizes the Court to require the                 
          taxpayer to pay a penalty not in excess of $25,000 when it                  
          appears to the Court that, inter alia, proceedings have been                
          instituted or maintained by the taxpayer primarily for delay or             
          that the taxpayer’s position in such proceeding is frivolous or             
          groundless.  In Pierson v Commissioner, 115 T.C. 576, 581 (2000),           
          we warned that taxpayers abusing the protections afforded by                
          sections 6320 and 6330 through the bringing of dilatory or                  
          frivolous lien or levy actions will face sanctions under section            
          6673.  We have since repeatedly disposed of cases premised on               
          arguments akin to those raised herein summarily and with                    
          imposition of the section 6673 penalty.  See, e.g., Craig v.                
          Commissioner, supra at 264-265 (and cases cited thereat).                   
               With respect to the instant matter, we are convinced that              
          petitioner instituted this proceeding primarily for delay by                
          advancing contentions previously and consistently rejected by               
          this and other courts.  We note that during petitioner’s hearing            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011