- 8 -
deal they made but only apply additional deductions to the agreed
upon deficiency. To support their argument, they rely on Urbano
v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 384, 392 (2004), where we held that the
parties’ agreement that a particular amount could be assessed did
not bar us from reviewing that amount when the reason for review
was not part of the original agreement and was unknown by either
party at the time the agreement was signed. The Nicholses claim
that their situation is just like the one in Urbano because their
NOLs weren’t included in the Form 870 and neither party knew of
their availability when they signed the form.
The problem with this argument is that Urbano featured a
different IRS form, Form 4549-CG. Id. at 387. The consent-to-
assessment language on a Form 4549-CG states: “I do not wish to
* * * contest in the United States Tax Court the findings in this
report. Therefore, I give my consent to the immediate assessment
and collection of any increase in tax and penalties * * * .”
This waiver, which extends only to “the findings in this report,”
is plainly more limited than the waiver on a Form 870. And in
Urbano, we heard the taxpayers’ challenge to the amount of
interest that they owed because the “findings” reported on the
Form 4549-CG did not include a finding on that issue. Id. at
392. A Form 870 has a different purpose--it memorializes an
agreement that the Commissioner can assess a particular amount of
tax. Someone signing a Form 870 is not even agreeing that he
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011