- 10 -
Next, we consider petitioner’s claim that respondent
misapplied the proceeds of the 1999 check to years other than
1999. According to petitioner, had the proceeds of the 1999
check been properly applied to his 1999 liability, he would owe
less than respondent is attempting to collect. All things
considered, we cannot help but note that, had the proceeds of the
1999 check been applied entirely to his 1999 tax liability,
petitioner’s 1998 tax liability would now closely approximate the
amount that respondent claims he now owes for 1999.9 Petitioner,
who is a practicing attorney, refused to acknowledge this point
during trial.
Nevertheless, ignoring the practical infirmities of
petitioner’s position, we address, on a technical basis,
respondent’s decision to apply the proceeds of the 1999 check to
years other than 1999.
As noted in correspondence with petitioner, respondent
justifies the manner in which the proceeds of the 1999 check
were applied upon the ground that petitioner did not, in writing,
designate the year(s) to which the proceeds of the 1999 check
should be applied. We have examined the 1999 check and,
consistent with respondent’s position, nothing on the face of the
9 By June 2, 2003, the date the 1999 check was received,
petitioner’s 1998 liability for the sec. 6651(a)(2) addition to
tax had reached the maximum amount allowable under the statute,
but that addition to tax for 1999 would continue to accrue at the
rate of .5 percent per month for 9 more months.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007