-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