- 11 -
Forms 4340 do not indicate, nor does petitioner contend, that he
made any such payments for 1998 or 1999. Respondent therefore
has met his burden of production. As petitioner has not shown
that any of the statutory exceptions are applicable, respondent’s
determination on this issue is sustained.
II. The Proposed Levy
Petitioner asserts that respondent failed to satisfy the
requirements of section 6330. Specifically, petitioner contends
that he was not given notice and demand for payment of tax as
required by section 6303(a).
In general, section 6303(a) provides that the Secretary
shall give notice and demand for payment to the taxpayer within
60 days of making an assessment of tax. A settlement officer may
rely on Form 4340 to verify that a notice and demand for payment
was sent to the taxpayer. See Hansen v. United States, 7 F.3d
137, 138 (9th Cir. 1993); Clough v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2007-106 n.6.
The Forms 4340 for 1997, 1998, and 1999 show that respondent
issued petitioner timely notices of balance due, which constitute
notice and demand for payment within the meaning of section
6303(a). Clough v. Commissioner, supra n.7; Standifird v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-245, affd. 72 Fed. Appx. 729 (9th
Cir. 2003). Petitioner has failed to present any credible
evidence that notice and demand was not issued as indicated on
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007