Kevin Clare and Sarah Louise Moore - Page 6




                                        - 5 -                                         
          farm property.  Since petitioners apparently did not purchase               
          another residence within 12 months, they were required to report            
          and accordingly, pay tax on, the proceeds from the sale as long             
          term capital gain.  While we sympathize with the fact that                  
          petitioners are middle-income taxpayers who, without the proceeds           
          of sale, would not otherwise be subject to the alternative                  
          minimum tax, we cannot change the facts, nor the statute, to                
          provide them with equitable relief. The triggering event in this            
          case was a one-time sale, making petitioners subject to the                 
          alternative minimum tax.  It is simply beyond the purview of this           
          Court to decide otherwise.                                                  
               We also remind petitioners that this Court has consistently            
          and repeatedly rejected challenges to proposed deficiencies based           
          on the fairness of the alternative minimum tax.  Kenseth v.                 
          Commissioner, 259 F.3d 881 (7th Cir. 2001), affg. 114 T.C. 399              
          (2000); Merlo v. Commissioner, 126 T.C. 205 (2006); see also                
          Alexander v. IRS, 72 F.3d 938 (1st Cir. 1995), affg. T.C. Memo.             
          1995-51; Okin v. Commissioner, 808 F.2d 1338 (9th Cir. 1987),               
          affg. T.C. Memo. 1985-199; Warfield v. Commissioner, 84 T.C. 179            
          (1985); Huntsberry v. Commissioner, 83 T.C. 742 (1984).                     
          Accordingly, we sustain respondent’s proposed deficiency.                   
               Finally, as to the issue of interest, petitioner did not               
          either formally request an abatement of the interest on the                 
          liability at issue as required under section 6404(e), nor did he            







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007