- 2 -
6653(a)(2),2 and of $34,322.10 under section 6659.3 Respondent
also determined that interest on the $140,388 underpayment must
be assessed at 120 percent of the statutory rate under section
6621(c).4
The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is
liable for the additions to tax under section 6653(a)(1) and (2);
(2) whether petitioner is liable for the addition to tax under
section 6659; (3) whether we have jurisdiction to decide if
petitioner is liable for additional interest5 under section
2Respondent concedes that the notice of deficiency
incorrectly refers to sec. 6653(a)(1) and (2) as sec.
6653(a)(1)(A) and (B).
3Sec. 6659 was repealed by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation
Act of 1989 (OBRA), Pub. L. 101-239, sec. 7721(c)(2), 103 Stat.
2399, effective for tax returns due after Dec. 31, 1989, OBRA
sec. 7721(d), 103 Stat. 2400. The repeal does not affect this
case.
4Sec. 6621(c) was repealed by OBRA sec. 7721(b), 103 Stat.
2399, effective with respect to returns due after Dec. 31, 1989,
OBRA sec. 7721(d). The repeal does not affect this case.
5In this opinion, the term “additional interest” means the
interest prescribed by sec. 6601, with the rate of interest
increasing to 120 percent of the underpayment rate under sec.
6621(c). White v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 209, 214 (1990).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011