97-0023

INCOME TAX

Signed 9/3/97

 

BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION

____________________________________

 

)

PETITIONER, :

) DECISION

Petitioner, :

v. )

:

AUDITING DIVISION OF THE ) Appeal No. 97-0023

UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, :

) Account No. #####

Respondent. : Tax Type: Income Tax

_____________________________________

 

STATEMENT OF CASE

This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act and the rules of the Utah State Tax Commission for informal adjudicative proceeding. A hearing was held on August 14, 1997. Jane Phan, Administrative Law Judge, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing Petitioners were PETITIONERS REP. and PETITIONERS REP.. Present and representing Respondent were Michelle Bush, Assistant Attorney General, and Daniel Engh from the Auditing Division.

Based upon the evidence in the file and presented at the hearing, the Commission makes its:

FINDINGS


Petitioners are appealing the assessment for the 1992 tax year of additional income tax in the amount of $$$$$, penalties of $$$$$ and interest of approximately $$$$$. The assessment was based on an increase of Petitioners' federal taxable income as determined in a settlement between Petitioners and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Petitioners did not file an amended return with the State of Utah based on the IRS adjustment, as is required by law. Respondent eventually received information concerning the change from the IRS and issued the Statutory Notice on October 15, 1996, assessing the additional tax, interest and penalty.

At the hearing Petitioners' representative argued that Petitioners should be allowed to relitigate the issue of whether or not Petitioners were entitled to a deduction for travel expenses in computing their federal taxable income. He stated that Petitioners settled with the IRS, not based on their legal position, but based instead on the cost of litigating the issue. He pointed out that Petitioners agreed to pay a certain amount to the IRS in settlement but did not specifically agree to an amount of federal taxable income, maintaining that the adjustment amount of federal taxable income was just a book keeping entry on the part of the IRS.

The representatives for Respondent argued that the amount of the assessment was based on the settlement amount. It was their position that if Petitioners were not bound by the settlement then the Auditing Division should go for the entire amount of the original IRS assessment. They argued that the taxpayer had agreed to the federal taxable income for whatever reason and the state should not relitigate the issue of whether or not Petitioners were entitled to the travel deduction.

APPLICABLE LAW


State taxable income is defined as federally taxable income with some modifications, subtractions and adjustments. (Utah Code Ann. '59-10-112.)

For the purposes of determining state taxable income, federal taxable income means taxable income as defined in Section 63, of the Internal Revenue Code. (Utah Code Ann. '59-10-111.)

If a change is made in a taxpayer's net income on his or her federal income tax return, either because the taxpayer has filed an amended return or because of an action by the federal government, the taxpayer must notify the Utah Tax Commission within 90 days after the final determination of such change. (Utah Code Ann. '59-10-536 (5)(a).)

The Tax Commission is granted the authority to waive, reduce, or compromise penalties and interest upon a showing of reasonable cause. (Utah Code Ann. '59-1-401(10).)

DECISION AND ORDER

The Tax Commission's policy is clear and has been applied uniformly to many similarly situated taxpayers. The Tax Commission does not make its own determination of a taxpayer's federal taxable income after an adjustment has been made by the IRS. Federal taxable income is based on the Internal Revenue Code, not Utah Law. Sound policy dictates that the Tax Commission give the IRS deference in interpreting the Internal Revenue Code.


The penalty was assessed because Petitioner did not file the required amended Utah individual income tax return after the change in federal taxable income. The Commission will waive the penalty based on first time error. Should it happen a second time the Commission will generally not be so lenient. Interest is statutory and no justification was presented for its waiver.

Based on the forging the Tax Commission sustains the assessment of additional income tax and interested assessed relating to Petitioners' 1992 income tax return. The Tax Commission waives the related 10% negligence penalty. It is so ordered.

DATED this 3 day of SEPTEMBER, 1997.

BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.

 

Jane Phan

Administrative Law Judge

 

The agency has reviewed this case and the undersigned concur in this decision.

 

DATED this 3 day of SEPTEMBER, 1997.

 

BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.

 

W. Val Oveson Richard B. McKeown

Chairman Commissioner

 

Joe B. Pacheco Pam Hendrickson

Commissioner Commissioner

^^