Joseph D. and Wanda S. Lunsford - Page 32




                                       - 32 -                                         
          determination1 letter.  We held in Meyer that the failure to offer          
          a hearing invalidated the determination and, thus, prevented us             
          from having jurisdiction over the case.  In Meyer we were correct           
          in relying on Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492, 497 (2000),            
          and stating:  “section 6330(b) contemplates that an Appeals Office          
          hearing, if duly requested by the taxpayer, must precede the                
          issuance of a determination letter.”  Meyer v. Commissioner, supra          
          at 422.  Because conducting a hearing is so fundamental to section          
          6330, the failure to do so precludes issuance of a determination            
          under section 6330, Offiler v. Commissioner, supra at 497-498, and          
          invalidates any purported determination.                                    
               We have no jurisdiction over, and may not adjudicate, a matter         
          if there has been no hearing.  Section 6330(b)(1) is unambiguous.2          


               1References to a “determination” are not intended to imply             
          whether it is a determination that meets the requirements of sec.           
          6330(c), (d), and (e).                                                      
               2When interpreting an unambiguous statute, it is not                   
          necessary to consider the legislative history.  Nevertheless, we            
          note that the legislative history accompanying sec. 6330 further            
          supports our position.  Congress promulgated sec. 6330 to                   
          establish “formal procedures designed to insure due process where           
          the IRS seeks to collect taxes by levy”.  S. Rept. 105-174, at 67           
          (1998), 1998-3 C.B. 537, 603.  The Senate Finance Committee                 
          stated that the Commissioner would, pursuant to sec. 6330, be               
          required to “afford taxpayers adequate notice of collection                 
          activity and a meaningful hearing before the IRS deprives them of           
          their property.”  Id.; see also H. Conf. Rept. 105-599, at 263              
          (1998), 1998-3 C.B. 747, 1017 (“If * * * the taxpayer demands a             
          hearing, the proposed collection action may not proceed until the           
          hearing has concluded and the appeals officer has issued his or             
          her determination.”).  The temporary regulations relating to sec.           
          6330 are fully consistent with the legislative history of the               
                                                             (continued...)           





Page:  Previous  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011