- 14 -
Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec.
3101(g), 112 Stat. 685, 729. It is apparent Congress understood
the qualified offer provision would apply to cases already
pending before the Court. However, if Congress intended the
qualified offer period to extend to the first time a case was set
for trial after enactment, it did not say as much. We strictly
construe in favor of the Government the waiver of sovereign
immunity in section 7430. Simpson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1995-194; see Ardestani v. INS, 502 U.S. 129, 137 (1991).
Accordingly, the qualified offer period had expired at the
time petitioner submitted her qualified offer with respect to
taxable years 1980 through 1984. However, respondent concedes
that petitioner submitted an offer within the qualified offer
period with respect to taxable year 1985.
2. Whether the Offer Clearly States the Amount Offered
Respondent next argues that petitioner’s alleged qualified
offer fails because petitioner did not clearly specify the amount
being offered.9 Section 301.7430-7(c)(3), Proced. & Admin.
9Respondent did not argue that petitioner’s offer was in bad
faith or lacked a reasonable relationship to the amount in issue.
See August v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 600 F.2d 699, 702 (7th Cir.
1979), affd. on other grounds 450 U.S. 346, 355 (1981) (“The
plain language of * * * [Fed. R. Civ. P. 68] makes it unnecessary
to read a reasonableness requirement into the Rule.”). Although
the plain language of sec. 7430 does not include any requirement
that a taxpayer’s qualified offer be made in good faith or with a
reasonable relationship to the amount in controversy, respondent
did not raise the issue, and we do not consider it here.
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007