- 23 -
The record convincingly demonstrates that petitioner
maintained these proceedings primarily for delay and that
petitioner’s positions regarding respondent’s deficiency
determination were frivolous and groundless. We believe that
petitioner’s conduct deserves an appropriate sanction under
section 6673. In setting the amount of the penalty, we recognize
that petitioner was courteous at trial and that he made a flawed
attempt to cooperate.17 We also recognize that this Court’s
opinion in Wheeler v. Commissioner, supra, was not released until
after the trial in this case. However, petitioner was warned
repeatedly by respondent and by this Court that his arguments in
this case could expose him to liability for the section
6673(a)(1) penalty, and he did not heed those warnings.
Accordingly, we shall require petitioner to pay to the United
States a penalty under section 6673(a)(1) of $1,500.
17During a pretrial conference, respondent confirmed that
petitioner had been cooperative in that he did not dispute the
amounts of the income adjustments, but the record demonstrates
that petitioner’s cooperation was extremely limited.
Petitioner’s limited cooperation is insufficient to counteract
his stubborn insistence on arguing positions consistently
rejected by this Court and others. See Wheeler v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2006-109.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011