- 24 -
decide whether the taxpayer’s request will be granted in the face
of any assessment period of limitations problem. If the request
is denied, the taxpayer will be treated as having exhausted his
or her administrative remedies. Sec. 301.7430-1(f), Example (4),
Proced. & Admin. Regs.
If, under the above circumstances, a taxpayer requests and
is granted an Appeals Office conference, the taxpayer would be
expected to participate in good faith in the Appeals Office
conference in spite of the imminent running of the period of
limitations. The possible lapse of the period of limitations on
assessment is respondent’s problem, not the taxpayer’s.
For years, many tax practitioners, on behalf of their
clients, have adopted a strategy to bypass a protest of
respondent’s proposed audit adjustments to respondent’s Appeals
Office. This strategy is based on the perceived risk that filing
a protest and “going to” appeals might result in new issues’
being raised by the Appeals Office and on a perceived advantage
of getting into court as soon as possible. See for explanations
of this strategy, Saltzman, IRS Practice & Procedure, par.
9.04[1] (2d ed. 1991), and Shafiroff, Internal Revenue Service
Practice & Procedure Deskbook, sec. 4.1, at 4-6 (3d ed. 2001).
The possible adoption of such a strategy may explain the
substance and tone of Haas’ letter of October 28, 1997, and the
decision of petitioners’ prior and current counsel to bypass
respondent’s Appeals Office. In light, however, of the
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011