Thomas Frederick Dadian and Lois Ann Dadian - Page 14

                                       - 14 -                                         
        in the resolution of petitioners’ case after the overall                      
        settlement was reached.                                                       
             Under current law, section 6404(e) would authorize abatement             
        of interest during periods in which the settlement of the Redwood             
        case was set aside as a result of managerial errors.  However, the            
        language added to section 6404(e) permitting the abatement of                 
        interest for unreasonable errors or delays in performing                      
        managerial acts applies only to tax years beginning after July 30,            
        1996, and thus does not apply in the present case.  Taxpayer Bill             
        of Rights 2, Pub. L. 104-168, sec. 301(c), 110 Stat. 1452, 1457               
        (1996).                                                                       
             For tax years prior to 1996, section 6404(e) allows interest             
        abatement only for errors or delays by an officer or employee of              
        the IRS in performing ministerial acts.  Respondent’s decision to             
        assign only one attorney to the Swanton TEFRA cases was not a                 
        ministerial act, because the decision required discretion and                 
        judgment.  See Mekulsia v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-138;                 
        Beagles v. Commissioner, supra; Jacobs v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.            
        2000-123; sec. 301.6404-2T(b)(2), Examples (4) and (5), Temporary             
        Proced. & Admin. Regs., 52 Fed. Reg. 30163 (Aug. 13, 1987).  The              
        settlement negotiations that lasted until September 1993 also were            
        not ministerial.  So, through September 1993, the delay was not               
        due to a ministerial act.  However, further analysis is necessary             








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011