- 4 -
setting forth his disagreement with the proposed levy. He
challenged the validity of, and requested that the Appeals
officer have at the hearing copies of documents pertaining to,
among other things, the underlying tax liability, the notice and
demand for payment, and the authority of various Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) personnel.
Settlement Officer Thomas L. Tracy (Mr. Tracy), of the IRS
Office of Appeals in Phoenix, Arizona, sent petitioner a letter
dated November 10, 2003, scheduling a hearing for December 5,
2003, and briefly outlining the hearing process. On December 3,
2003, petitioner telephoned Mr. Tracy and asked to delay the
hearing, on grounds that he needed to attend to his father who
had suffered a stroke. Mr. Tracy offered either a telephone
hearing or a face-to-face meeting the week of December 15.
Petitioner instead asked for a hearing by correspondence, and the
parties mutually agreed upon a deadline of December 17, 2003, for
Mr. Tracy’s receipt of petitioner’s submission. During the
conversation, Mr. Tracy advised petitioner that the issues thus
far presented by petitioner would be considered frivolous and not
relevant. Following the conversation, Mr. Tracy then sent a
letter dated December 3, 2003, expressly confirming the terms of
the agreement reached and expanding on the point made about
frivolous arguments and penalties therefor under section 6673.
The letter concluded with a warning that if Mr. Tracy did not
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011