- 5 -
Petitioner sold her residence on April 18, 1995, and has
lived in Tokyo, Japan, continuously since April 5, 1997.
Petitioner indicated on her Form 2119 that she intended to
replace her home within the replacement period. The replacement
period was suspended for the maximum of 4 years because
petitioner had a tax home outside the United States during that
time. The replacement period thus ended on April 18, 1999.
Petitioner had not replaced her home as of the date of trial, May
17, 2004. Therefore, petitioner did not replace her residence
within the replacement period and is liable for the capital gains
tax on the 1995 residence sale as calculated by Mr. Herrera and
paid on May 12, 2000.
Petitioner alleges that an employee of respondent’s in
Tokyo, Japan, gave her incorrect advice about the termination
date of the replacement period related to the 1995 residence
sale. Petitioner testified that she consulted the employee
“probably around June 15 [1999].” We note that according to
petitioner’s testimony, her contact with the employee was 2
months after the expiration of the replacement period.
Interest Abatement
Section 6404(e)(1) provides, in pertinent part, that the
Commissioner may abate the assessment of interest on any
deficiency attributable to any error or delay by an officer or
employee of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (acting in his
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011