- 29 -
(2) the estimated expenses of levy and sale will
not exceed the value of the property to be seized;
(3) the revenue officer has determined that there
is sufficient equity in the property to be seized to
yield net proceeds from sale to apply to the unpaid tax
liabilities; and
(4) with respect to the seizure of the assets of a
going business, the revenue officer recommending the
collection action has thoroughly considered the facts
of the case, including the availability of alternative
collection methods, before recommending the collection
action. [S. Rept. 105-174, at 68 (1998), 1998-3 C.B.
537, 604.2]
Form 4340 simply does not meet each of these verification
requirements. Form 4340 was sufficient both here and in Davis
because the only irregularity alleged as to the verification
requirement concerned the proper assessment.
VASQUEZ and GALE, JJ., agree with this concurring in result
opinion.
2 The fact that this quoted text relates solely to the
verification requirement of sec. 6330(c)(1) is seen not only by
reading the quoted text but by reading the text that appears
immediately thereafter. That text, which relates to sec.
6330(c)(2), provides:
The taxpayer (or affected third party) is allowed
to raise any relevant issue at the hearing. Issues
eligible to be raised include (but are not limited to):
(1) challenges to the underlying liability as to
existence or amount;
(2) appropriate spousal defenses;
(3) challenges to the appropriateness of
collection actions; and
(4) collection alternatives, which could include
the posting of a bond, substitution of other assets, an
installment agreement or an offer-in-compromise. [S.
Rept. 105-174, at 68 (1998), 1998-3 C.B. 537, 604.]
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011