Jesse M. and Lura L. Lewis - Page 29

                                       - 29 -                                         
          motivated) rate under section 6621(a).  The settlement offered by           
          respondent in January 1993 did not include the burnout feature              
          canceling the accrual of interest for the first year for which              
          multiyear deficiencies had been determined.                                 
               Respondent’s letters further stated:  “Acceptance of this              
          settlement offer will preclude any further challenge or appeal              
          with respect to the Kersting programs or the merits of the Dixon            
          opinion.”  The letter contained a “Sample Analysis” illustrating            
          a hypothetical taxpayer who owed $20,000 in Kersting-related                
          deficiencies for the taxable year 1985.  The analysis indicated             
          that, if the taxpayer accepted the new 7-percent reduction                  
          settlement offer, he or she would owe a total of $36,388 in tax             
          and interest.  However, if the taxpayer did not accept the                  
          settlement, the taxpayer would owe $67,901 under the piggyback              
          arrangement as given effect in accordance with this Court’s 1991            
          opinion.                                                                    
               Petitioners’ Settlements                                               
               Respondent made the initial mass mailing on January 8, 1993,           
          and sent copies to petitioners in the present cases.  Because               
          counsel for various petitioners complained they had not received            
          the settlement proposal letters, respondent remailed them to                
          those counsel on January 29, 1993.  Respondent sent Mr.                     
          O’Donnell, as first counsel of record for petitioners in the                
          present cases, copies of identical letters dated January 8 and              






Page:  Previous  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011