Michael D. Keown and Rosann C. Keown - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
                         4340, Certificate of Assessment, are annexed                 
                         for the period in dispute;                                   
                    c)   A copy of Section 6673 of the I.R.C., showing                
                         that the Tax Court can impose sanctions of up                
                         to $25,000 when a taxpayer institutes litiga-                
                         tion before it primarily for delay or based                  
                         on a frivolous position;                                     
                    d)   A copy of the case Davis v. Comm., T.C. Memo                 
                         [sic] 2001-87, in which it shows that the                    
                         court imposed sanctions of $4,000 against the                
                         taxpayer for raising frivolous arguments in a                
                         CDP case;                                                    
                    e)   A copy of the case Perry v. Comm., T.C. Memo                 
                         [sic] 2002-165, in which the court imposed                   
                         sanctions of $2,500 against the taxpayer for                 
                         raising frivolous arguments in a CDP case;                   
                  *       *       *       *       *       *       *                   
               Upon receipt of the first court opinion, he stated the                 
               courts were a separate issue and when Appeals tried to                 
               explain that the court could impose sanctions, he                      
               stated that would be like “squeezing the turnip.”                      
               The taxpayer was asked if he were [sic] interested in                  
               collection alternatives such as an offer in compromise,                
               or an installment agreement, and was reminded that all                 
               returns due to date must be appropriately filed for an                 
               offer to be considered, or for an installment agree-                   
               ment.  According to IRS computer records, the taxpayers                
               have not filed returns for 2000-2001.  The taxpayer                    
               claims the returns have been filed showing zero income.                
               He was asked if he had wages and he said yes, but                      
               stated he did not believe that wages were taxable                      
               income and he was unwilling to discuss collection                      
               alternatives.  Collection issues could not be discussed                
               with Rosann Keown as she did not attend the hearing.                   
               The taxpayer raised no non-filer issues.  The informa-                 
               tion previously submitted by the taxpayers was re-                     
               viewed, and Rosann Keown raised no non-filer issues.                   
               Balancing the Need for Efficient Collection with Tax-                  
               payer Concerns                                                         
               The requirements of all applicable laws and administra-                
               tive procedures have been met.  The taxpayers received                 
               their required notices.  At the hearing, Appeals raised                





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011