- 12 -
Although the present case involves a potential installment
payment agreement and not an offer in compromise, we think the
deference shown in Rodriguez v. Commissioner, supra, to the
Commissioner’s collection procedures applies equally to the
present case. Specifically, we do not think it is an abuse of
discretion for the Commissioner to decline to offer an
installment payment agreement to a taxpayer if the taxpayer
continues to dispute the underlying liability.5 After all, an
installment payment agreement contemplates payment of an amount
acknowledged as owed. See Internal Revenue Manual 5.19.1.5.4.1;
Form 433-D, Installment Agreement; see also sec. 6159; sec.
301.6159-1, Proced. & Admin. Regs.
In sum, petitioners have failed to demonstrate that the
proposed levy action is inappropriate, that another collection
alternative is more appropriate, or that some other relevant
issue adversely affects respondent’s proposed collection action.
Respondent’s determination to proceed by levy with the collection
of petitioners’ outstanding liabilities for 1992 and 1993 was not
an abuse of discretion.
5 Indeed, it is hard to imagine that a taxpayer would even
want to enter into an installment payment agreement if the
taxpayer not only disputed the underlying liability but wished to
take that dispute to court.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011