- 20 -
performing a ministerial act is taken into account only if it is
in no significant aspect attributable to the taxpayer, and only
if it occurs after the IRS has contacted the taxpayer in writing
regarding the deficiency or payment.
Section 6404(e) is not intended to be “used routinely to
avoid payment of interest” but rather is to be “utilized in
instances where failure to abate interest would be widely
perceived as grossly unfair.” H. Rept. 99-426, at 844 (1985),
1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 2) 1, 844; S. Rept. 99-313, at 208 (1986),
1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 3) 1, 208.
1. Jurisdiction
We have jurisdiction to decide whether respondent’s failure
to abate interest under section 6404(e) was an abuse of
discretion. See sec. 6404(h). Review of petitioner’s challenge
to his underlying liability for taxes and penalties is precluded
in these cases, if not by the limitations of section 6404(h),
which gives the Tax Court jurisdiction only with respect to
claims for abatement of interest, see Krugman v. Commissioner,
112 T.C. 230, 237 (1999), then, as previously discussed, by
12(...continued)
discussed, in neither the administrative proceeding nor this
proceeding has petitioner properly challenged respondent’s
failure to abate interest for years other than 1987, 1990, and
1991. Therefore, the amendment is inapplicable to the instant
cases. We intend no inference that we would reach a different
result in these cases if the amendment were applicable.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011