- 13 -
issue or set of issues presented, sec. 7430(c)(4)(A)(i)(II), and
(2) meets the net worth requirements of 28 U.S.C. sec.
2412(d)(2)(B) (net worth requirements), sec. 7430(c)(4)(A)(ii).
In order to qualify for an award under section 7430(a), the
prevailing party must (1) have exhausted the available adminis-
trative remedies, sec. 7430(b)(1), and (2) not have unreasonably
protracted the court proceeding, sec. 7430(b)(3). The party
moving for an award under section 7430(a) has the burden of
establishing that all of the foregoing criteria have been satis-
fied and that the costs claimed are reasonable litigation costs
incurred in connection with the court proceeding under section
7430(a)(2). Rule 232(e); see also Corson v. Commissioner, 123
T.C. 202, 205-206 (2004).
There is an exception to the definition in section
7430(c)(4)(A) of the term “prevailing party”. That exception is
found in section 7430(c)(4)(B), which provides: “A party shall
not be treated as the prevailing party in a proceeding * * * if
the United States establishes that the position of the United
States in the proceeding was substantially justified.” Sec.
7430(c)(4)(B)(i).
The position of the United States is substantially justified
if it “is one that is ‘justified to a degree that could satisfy a
reasonable person’ or that has a ‘reasonable basis both in law
and fact.’ Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 565 (1988)”.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007