Andy Hromiko - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          Petitioner further contends that respondent generally does not              
          undertake collection actions while appeals of the underlying tax            
          liability are pending and that respondent’s doing so in the                 
          instant case violates his right to due process and equal                    
               Petitioner’s argument has no merit.  Section 7485(a)(1)                
          specifically provides that review of a decision of the Tax Court            
          by a U.S. Court of Appeals shall not operate as a stay of                   
          collection of any deficiency determined by the Tax Court unless             
          the taxpayer files a bond with the Tax Court on or before the               
          time his notice of appeal is filed.  Petitioner concedes that he            
          posted no bond.  Accordingly, it was not an abuse of discretion             
          for the Appeals officer to conclude that respondent could proceed           
          with collection actions notwithstanding the appeal.4                        
               C.  Conclusion                                                         
               For the reasons discussed above, we conclude that all                  
          arguments raised by petitioner against respondent’s determination           
          to proceed with collection lack merit.  Accordingly, we hold that           
          respondent did not abuse his discretion and may proceed with the            
          collection actions that were the subject of the notice in Letter            

               4 Petitioner’s contentions based on his rights to due                  
          process or equal protection hardly merit comment.  Suffice it to            
          say that the instant proceeding pursuant to sec. 6330 accords               
          petitioner his rights under the Fifth Amendment; he has obtained            
          review of the proposed levy both by an Appeals officer and this             

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011