- 16 -
we find that respondent did not abuse respondent’s discretion in
determining to proceed with the collection action as determined
in the notice of determination and in the decision letter with
respect to petitioner’s taxable years 1994, 1996, 1998, and 1999.
Although respondent does not ask the Court to impose a
penalty on petitioner under section 6673(a)(1), we now consider
sua sponte whether the Court should impose a penalty on peti-
tioner under that section. Section 6673(a)(1) authorizes the
Court to require a taxpayer to pay a penalty to the United States
in an amount not to exceed $25,000 whenever it appears that a
taxpayer instituted or maintained a proceeding in the Court
primarily for delay or that a taxpayer's position in such a
proceeding is frivolous or groundless.
In an Order dated February 23, 2004, the Court cautioned
petitioner that in the event he were to advance in this matter or
any future matter arguments that the Court finds to be frivolous
and/or without merit, it is likely that the Court would impose a
penalty on him under section 6673(a)(1). Since that time,
petitioner has not advanced any contentions or arguments in this
case. See supra note 1. Although we shall not impose a penalty
under section 6673(a)(1) on petitioner in the instant case, we
caution him that he may be subject to such a penalty if in the
future he institutes or maintains a proceeding in this Court
primarily for delay and/or his position in any such proceeding is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011