-6-
standard where the validity of the underlying tax liability is at
issue. A taxpayer’s underlying tax liability may be at issue if
he or she “did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for
such tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to
dispute such tax liability.” Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B). The Court will
review the Commissioner’s administrative determination for abuse
of discretion with respect to all other issues. Sego v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000).
Here, petitioners do not dispute the existence or the amount
of an underlying tax liability. Therefore, the proper standard
for our review of respondent’s determination is abuse of
discretion. Under section 6330(c)(3), the determination of an
Appeals officer must take into consideration (A) the verification
that the requirements of applicable law and administrative
procedures have been met, (B) issues raised by the taxpayer, and
(C) whether any proposed collection action balances the need for
the efficient collection of taxes with the legitimate concern of
the person that any collection be no more intrusive than
necessary.
Here, the Appeals officer addressed all these matters.
He satisfied the first requirement by reviewing the Internal
Revenue Service transcripts of petitioners’ account. Hill v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-272; Kuglin v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2002-51; Weishan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-88.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011