D. Jean Bartelma and Dan F. Bartelma - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         
          from accruing.  Petitioners could have paid as early as the date            
          of the original notices of deficiency in February 2000, or they             
          could have paid upon settlement of the original Tax Court cases             
          in October 2000.  When petitioners made voluntary payments in May           
          2001, they could have paid the entire amounts due and requested             
          refunds in their abatement claims.  Finally, petitioners could              
          have paid when they received their final tax bills in December              
          2001 and January 2002, respectively.  However, petitioners did              
          not pay the entire amounts due until December 10, 2002.                     
          Petitioners’ delayed payments of their liabilities are not                  
          attributable to error or delay by any officer or employee of the            
          IRS in performing a ministerial act.  Sec. 6404(e)(1)(B).                   
               Because petitioners presented neither authority nor evidence           
          to support their claim that there were ministerial errors and               
          delays above and beyond those that had already been identified              
          and remedied, there was no abuse of discretion in denying an                
          additional abatement of interest in these cases.                            
               To reflect the foregoing,                                              

                                                  Decisions will be entered           
                                             for respondent.                          

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  

Last modified: May 25, 2011