- 12 -
circumstances, we cannot award costs. See Swanson v.
Commissioner, 106 T.C. 76, 101 (1996).
Petitioners contend that they “have incurred these
reasonable fees to Grigoraci, Trainer, Wright & Paterno and both
Pamela S. Lyons and Gina West should qualify as a representative
and, if not, surely these are reasonable expenses for the
Petitioners to incur as pro se.” Respondent concedes that Ms.
Lyons and Ms. West have Centralized Authorization File numbers,
which might allow those individuals to represent taxpayers before
the IRS. Nonetheless, nothing in petitioners’ supporting
materials or affidavits suggests that either Ms. Lyons or Ms.
West performed services for petitioners in a representative
capacity. On the contrary, their services appear to have been
12(...continued)
employees resulted in any incremental cost to either GTWP or
petitioners. Given that the employees who rendered these
services worked under Mr. Grigoraci’s direct supervision and that
he was C.E.O. of GTWP, it might reasonably be inferred that these
services were rendered as an accommodation to him in that
capacity. In these circumstances, we are unpersuaded that
petitioners are entitled to shift to respondent a portion of what
appears to be GTWP’s fixed overhead. Moreover, we note that Ms.
West’s affidavit states that the invoiced amounts were based on
the lowest “customary” GTWP billing rates used for the named
employees during the relevant time periods. Presumably, the
customary GTWP billing rates include a profit margin that would
accrue partly to the benefit of Mr. Grigoraci, as an indirect
partner in GTWP. At least to that extent, the invoiced amounts
represent a lost opportunity cost, which petitioners are not
entitled to recover under sec. 7430. See Corrigan v. United
States, 27 F.3d 436, 439 (9th Cir. 1994); United States v.
McPherson, 840 F.2d 244, 245 (4th Cir. 1988); Frisch v.
Commissioner, 87 T.C. 838, 845-846 (1986).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011