George G. Green - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         
          to review the jeopardy assessment and jeopardy levy.9  See Rule             
          56 (stating that "Review of a jeopardy assessment or a jeopardy             
          levy under Code section 7429(b) shall be commenced by filing a              
          motion with the Court.").                                                   
               We do not interpret section 7429(b)(1) to allow for the                
          filing of a civil action 90 days from the date of respondent's              
          administrative determination in this case.  We interpret section            
          7429(b)(1), instead, in the same manner as the Court of Appeals             
          for the Eleventh Circuit, which has held on this same point:                
                    Alternatively, Fernandez argues that the                          
               provisions of section 7429(b)(1) are permissive and not                
               mandatory.  The language of the statute itself negates                 
               such an interpretation.  To adopt Fernandez's argument                 
               would mean that Congress intended that the taxpayer in                 
               every case would have thirty days [90 days under the                   
               current statute] following the administrative                          
               determination by the Secretary.  If Congress had so                    
               intended it would have omitted the word ‘earlier’ from                 
               the statute and replaced it with the word ‘either.’                    
               The objective of the statute is to provide expedited                   
               review.  S. Rep. No. 938 (Part I) 94th Cong. 2d Sess.                  
               364 (1976), reprinted in 1976 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad.                    
               News 3793.  If we were to accept the rationale of                      
               Fernandez's argument, the objective of expedience would                


               9 Although we have not previously decided an issue on the              
          basis of sec. 7429(b)(1), the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh             
          Circuit and several Federal District Courts have decided the                
          issue before us and have reached similar conclusions.  See, e.g.,           
          Fernandez v. United States, 704 F.2d 592 (11th Cir. 1983);                  
          Wapnick v. United States, 79 AFTR 2d 97-2515, 96-2 USTC par.                
          50,516 (E.D.N.Y. 1996), affd. 112 F.3d 74 (2d Cir. 1997); Resnick           
          v. United States, 85-1 USTC par. 9,405 (D. Minn. 1985); Konieczwy           
          v. Commissioner, 54 AFTR 2d 84-5443, 84-2 USTC par. 9,684 (N.D.             
          Tex. 1984); Friestak v. Egger, 551 F. Supp. 238 (M.D. Pa. 1982);            
          Bryant v. United States, 47 AFTR 2d 81-1045, 81-1 USTC par. 9,296           
          (M.D. Tenn. 1981); Sacchinelli v. United States, 47 AFTR 2d 81-             
          369, 80-2 USTC par. 9,841 (N.D. Ga. 1980).                                  




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

Last modified: May 25, 2011