Lance Standifird - Page 5




                                         -5-                                          
               On October 16, 2000, petitioner filed a Complaint with the             
          United States District Court for the District of Arizona.  The              
          Court dismissed that Complaint on June 12, 2001.  Stanifird v.              
          Wilcox, 87 AFTR 2d 2585, 2001-2 USTC par. 50,492 (D. Ariz. 2001).           
                                     Discussion                                       
               Section 6331(a) provides that if any person liable to pay              
          any tax neglects or refuses to pay such tax within 10 days after            
          notice and demand for payment, the Secretary may collect such tax           
          by levy on the person’s property.  Section 6331(d) provides that            
          at least 30 days before enforcing collection by levy on the                 
          person’s property, the Secretary must provide the person with a             
          final notice of intent to levy, including notice of the                     
          administrative appeals available to the person.                             
               Section 6330 generally provides that the Commissioner cannot           
          proceed with collection by levy until the person has been given             
          notice and the opportunity for an administrative review of the              
          matter (in the form of an Appeals Office hearing) and, if                   
          dissatisfied, with judicial review of the administrative                    
          determination.  Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 37 (2000);              
          Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 179 (2000).  In the case of             
          such judicial review, the Court will review a taxpayer’s                    
          liability under the de novo standard where the validity of the              
          underlying tax liability is at issue.  The Court will review the            
          Commissioner’s administrative determination for abuse of                    






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011