Henry Randolph Consulting - Page 5




                                        - 5 -                                          

          875 F.2d 1396 (9th Cir. 1989).  Petitioner argues that none of               
          the cases cited by respondent are on point, but petitioner has               
          cited no case that held invalid a notice analogous to the notice             
          in issue here.                                                               
               Petitioner relies on ipse dixit and on the bald assertion               
          that "the statutory scheme in this case is clear and Respondent              
          has manifestly violated it."  We are not persuaded.  The                     
          statutory scheme provides to taxpayers a remedy not previously               
          available, to wit, an opportunity to have employment status                  
          disputes resolved in this Court.  See Randolph Consulting I,                 
          supra at 9-10.  As in other cases within our jurisdiction, the               
          notice of that determination is the taxpayer's "ticket to the Tax            
          Court".  The notice sent to petitioner is the "Notice of                     
          Determination Concerning Worker Classification Under Section                 
          7436" that permits the taxpayer to seek relief in this Court.  It            
          specifically states that the determination described in section              
          7436 has been made.  As we held in Randolph Consulting I, we do              
          not have jurisdiction to determine the amount of taxes owing.  In            
          any event, attachments to the notice sent to petitioner                      
          calculated the amounts to be assessed.  The failure to attach the            
          list of named individuals that respondent determined to be                   
          employees is not incurable.  It was cured in this instance by the            
          attachment to the Answer, and no prejudice to petitioner can be              
          asserted plausibly.                                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011