- 18 -
T.C. 695, 700 (1992). It is well settled, however, that the
Commissioner cannot be estopped from correcting a mistake of law,
even where a taxpayer may have relied to his detriment on that
mistake. Norfolk S. Corp. v. Commissioner, 104 T.C. 13, 59-60
(1995), affd. 140 F.3d 240 (4th Cir. 1998). An exception exists
only in the rare case where a taxpayer can prove he or she would
suffer an unconscionable injury because of that reliance. Id. at
60.
The following conditions must be satisfied before equitable
estoppel will be applied against the Government: (1) A false
representation or wrongful, misleading silence by the party
against whom the opposing party seeks to invoke the doctrine; (2)
an error in a statement of fact and not in an opinion or
statement of law; (3) ignorance of the true facts; (4) reasonable
reliance on the acts or statements of the one against whom
estoppel is claimed; and (5) adverse effects of the acts or
statement of the one against whom estoppel is claimed. Id. In
addition, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit requires the
party seeking to apply the doctrine against the Government to
prove affirmative misconduct. Miller v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2001-55.
Petitioners have not demonstrated affirmative misconduct by
respondent, nor have they established the other elements
necessary for equitable estoppel to apply. Accordingly,
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