- 15 -
supra, as counsel for the amici. While petitioners in their
brief suggest that the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
knowingly wrote its opinion in Fargo in such a way as to
distinguish that case from the cases of counsel’s similarly
situated clients (e.g., petitioners), and otherwise to allow
those clients to receive an abatement of their liability
attributable to partnerships such as those here, we do not read
the opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in
Fargo to support that conclusion.
Third, petitioners argue that Cochran inadequately
considered their unique facts and circumstances. We disagree.
Cochran reviewed and considered all information given to her by
petitioners. On the basis of the facts and circumstances of
petitioners’ case as they had been presented to her, Cochran
determined that petitioners’ offer did not meet the applicable
guidelines for acceptance of an offer-in-compromise to promote
effective tax administration based on economic hardship or public
policy or equity grounds. We find no abuse of discretion in that
determination. Nor do we find that Cochran inadequately
considered the information actually given to her by petitioners.
Cochran allowed the full amount of medical expenses that
petitioners submitted on their Form 433-A. While petitioners
claimed during the administrative hearing that they would incur
increased medical expenses in the future, they provided no
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011