- 127 -
and so hold. It seems especially incongruous to impose an
addition for a few months’ delay in filing a return at this time,
when 25 years have passed since that delay occurred. All
affected taxpayers are to be relieved of all penalties and
additions to tax that were determined in their statutory notices
of deficiency, not just Kersting-related items such as negligence
additions.
2. Allowance of Bauspar Deductions
We concluded earlier that Bauspar relief was part of the
Thompson settlement. See supra Part II.E.4. Moreover,
respondent’s analysis of the Bauspar program indicates that at
least some of the alleged mortgage payments made to Bauspar by
its borrowers would qualify for mortgage interest deductions; as
respondent’s counsel Henry O’Neill (O’Neill) observed: “real
dollars are involved”. Accordingly, we shall direct that any
disallowed deductions relating to Bauspar are to be treated as
valid deductions with respect to those taxpayers who may have
claimed them. That’s the way Bauspar played out for the
Thompsons, and so should it be for the other taxpayers before the
Court against whom Bauspar-related deficiencies have been
determined.
3. Elimination of Non-Kersting Deficiencies
Respondent indicates that perhaps 100 of the affected
taxpayers have non-Kersting-related items in the deficiencies
Page: Previous 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011