- 46 -
were entered by the Court on December 22, 1988. The settlement
provided that the taxpayers were not liable for the additions to
tax under section 6653(a) or increased interest for tax-motivated
transactions under section 6621(c) (Miller settlement). Fisher
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-434; Estate of Satin v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-435.
This Court decided Provizer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1992-177, on March 27, 1992. In our Provizer opinion, and in the
affirmance, all of the Plastics Recycling issues were decided for
respondent, including the additions to tax under section 6653(a)
and increased interest under section 6621(c). Respondent did not
notify the taxpayers in the Fisher and Estate of Satin cases or
notify any other taxpayers of the settlement of the Miller cases.
Respondent ultimately attempted collection from the Fisher and
Estate of Satin taxpayers pursuant to our decision in the
Provizer case and paragraph 5 of the piggyback agreement set
forth above. For reasons explained more fully in our above-cited
opinions, we held that the taxpayers in the Fisher and Estate of
Satin cases were entitled to be bound by the Miller settlement.
Petitioner contends that the protest letter is the
equivalent of a piggyback agreement that would entitle him to the
Miller settlement. We disagree. The piggyback agreement is an
Page: Previous 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011