- 2 - SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION SWIFT, Judge: This matter is before us on petitioners’ motion for partial summary judgment as to the applicability of the qualified offer provision of section 7430(c)(4)(E). Petitioners seek a recovery of litigation costs relating to a Federal income tax deficiency adjustment determined by respondent with respect to income to be charged to petitioners on termination of water rights (water rights adjustment). Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue. Under the qualified offer provision of section 7430(c)(4)(E), petitioners seek to obtain an award of litigation costs that they incurred after May 12, 1999, the date on which petitioners made a qualified offer to respondent to settle the water rights adjustment.1 Relying on the “settlement limitation” set forth in section 7430(c)(4)(E)(ii)(I), respondent argues that the ultimate 1 At this point, it is not clear whether petitioners also (or in the alternative) will be seeking the recovery of litigation costs relating to the water rights adjustment under the general litigation cost recovery provisions of sec. 7430. In any event, petitioners acknowledge that, under the qualified offer provision of sec. 7430(c)(4)(E), they are entitled to recover only litigation costs incurred after May 12, 1999, the date on which petitioners made their qualified offer to respondent. The parties suggest that once the issue raised in the instant motion is resolved, they likely will be able to settle other aspects of petitioners’ motion for litigation costs.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011