Gilbert Vasquez - Page 19

                                       - 19 -                                         
                                     Discussion                                       
               We consider first respondent’s objections to receipt of                
          certain exhibits, then the general considerations regarding                 
          motions for litigation costs, then whether respondent established           
          that “the position of the United States in the [instant]                    
          proceeding was substantially justified”, and then several of the            
          other issues that the parties presented.                                    
          A.  Evidence                                                                
          1.  National Taxpayer Advocate Report                                       
               Exhibit 22-P is Publication 2104B, National Taxpayer                   
          Advocate 2004 Annual Report to Congress, Volume 2, Earned Income            
          Tax Credit (EITC) Audit Reconsideration Study, dated December 31,           
          2004.  Exhibit 22-P is hereinafter sometimes referred to as the             
          Report.  Respondent objects to receipt of the Report on the                 
          ground of relevance.  Petitioner’s position is that this report             
          “covers errors related to Earned Income Tax Credit this                     
          documented error rate tends to prove errors occurred in                     
          petitioner’s case, therefore relevancy is satisfied.” (Reproduced           
          literally.)  Petitioner cites the Report at numerous points in              
          his legal memoranda to show that “the IRS regularly makes errors            
          as to EIC issues.”                                                          
               Rule 402 of the Federal Rules of Evidence (see sec. 7453)              
          provides the general rule that all relevant evidence is                     
          admissible, while evidence which is not relevant is not                     






Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011