AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Taxation and Revenue Department assessed penalties against Mekko Miller and Elaine Suazo-Miller (Taxpayers) for non-payment of personal income taxes for the years 2004, 2005, and 2006. The penalties were based on the failure to file tax returns or pay taxes when due, attributed to negligence or disregard of Department rules without intent to evade taxes. The Department applied a ten percent penalty for the 2004 tax year and a twenty percent penalty for the 2005 and 2006 tax years, following a legislative amendment that increased the maximum penalty.

Procedural History

• Hearing Officer, Taxation and Revenue Department, February 10, 2010: Denied Taxpayers' protest but reduced the penalty for 2005 and 2006 to ten percent based on the law prior to its 2007 amendment.

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellant (Department): Argued for the application of the twenty percent maximum penalty for the 2005 and 2006 tax years based on the 2007 amendment to Section 7-1-69, which was in effect at the time the assessments were issued.
• Defendants-Appellees (Taxpayers): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the date of the assessment under Section 7-1-69 determines the maximum penalty that the Department can apply.
• Whether the 2007 amendment to Section 7-1-69, which increased the maximum penalty to twenty percent, applies to the assessments for the 2005 and 2006 tax years.

Disposition

• Affirmed the hearing officer's decision regarding the ten percent penalty for the 2004 tax year.
• Partially reversed the hearing officer's decision for the 2005 and 2006 tax years, imposing a twenty percent maximum penalty.

Reasons

• Per Timothy L. Garcia, J. (James J. Wechsler, J., and Linda M. Vanzi, J., concurring): The Court relied on precedent from GEA Integrated Cooling Technology v. New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department, which established that the date of the assessment determines the applicable maximum penalty under Section 7-1-69. Since the assessments for the 2005 and 2006 tax years were issued after the 2007 amendment took effect, the twenty percent maximum penalty applies to these years. The decision for the 2004 tax year was affirmed because the assessment occurred before the amendment's effective date, justifying the ten percent penalty.