- 19 -
required installment of estimated tax ceases to accrue on April
15 of the following year). Those observations in no way depend
on the subsequently repealed statutory language we examined in
Risman.
B. Facts and Circumstances Analysis
1. Relevance of Existing Fifth Circuit Precedent
We first consider petitioners’ argument concerning the
“legal landscape in the Fifth Circuit”. As a matter of logic,
the “legal landscape in the Fifth Circuit” can be probative of
petitioners’ intent regarding the 1994 remittance only if they
were aware of that precedent when they made the remittance.
Petitioners have made no allegation to that effect, either in
their administrative appeal or in connection with these
proceedings, nor does the record contain any evidence that would
support such an allegation.13 To the extent petitioners are
suggesting that we should legally presume their awareness of that
precedent for these purposes, they do not cite, nor are we aware
of, any authority for such a proposition. We therefore conclude
that, absent any allegations or evidence that these petitioners
(as opposed to the generic “any taxpayer remitting to the IRS”
13 Assuming, arguendo, that the requisite intent could be
supplied by petitioners’ agents (e.g., the C.P.A. whose signature
appears on the 1993 Form 4868), petitioners have not alleged that
any such agent acted on the basis of, or was even aware of, the
Fifth Circuit position, nor does the record contain any evidence
that would support such an allegation.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011