- 13 -
finalized, would provide guidance to address, in part, the
directive in RRA 1998 to develop a plan to prohibit ex parte
communication between officers of the Appeals Office and other
IRS employees that appear to compromise the independence of the
Appeals Office. Before issuing final guidance, the Treasury
Department and the IRS invited comments from the public to aid in
the development of this revenue procedure. Notice 99-50, 1999-2
C.B. at 444, states that “The prohibition on ex parte
communication will not take effect until the revenue procedure is
issued in final form. In the interim, existing procedures
relating to communications in the course of Appeals consideration
of disputes remain in effect.”
The effective date of Rev. Proc. 2000-43, 2000-2 C.B. 404,
which deals with ex parte communications between officers of the
Appeals Office and other IRS employees, by its terms is October
23, 2000.
II. Parties’ Contentions
Respondent contends that AO Martin was an impartial Appeals
officer as that term is used in section 6330(b)(3). Respondent
also contends that AO Martin correctly considered
(1) whether the legal and procedural requirements
were met with regard to the Final Notice - Notice of
Intent to Levy, (2) whether there were any valid
challenges to the liability, and (3) whether the
collection action balanced the need for efficient
collection of taxes with * * * [petitioners’]
legitimate concern that any collection action be no
more intrusive than necessary.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011