- 6 -
On July 30, 2002, the Appeals officer again wrote to
petitioner as follows:
The Revenue Officer has completed the investigation of
your Offer in Compromise submitted as a collection
alternative.
The investigation reveals that your offer in the amount
of $3,763 is not adequate. The financial analysis
indicates that your offer should be increased to at
least $59,676. I have attached copies of the
Asset/Equity Table (AET) and Income/Expense Table (IET)
to support this determination.
I have also enclosed Form 656 [Offer in Compromise] for
you to submit an “amended offer” for $59,676 if this is
acceptable to you.
If you have any questions or wish to discuss further,
please contact me at the telephone number shown above.
If I do not receive a response from you, I will assume
that you no longer wish to pursue this matter. I will
issue my determination based on the available
information in your case file.
Petitioner did not contact the Appeals officer by telephone,
as she had suggested. By letter dated August 14, 2002, mailed
August 19, 2002, and received by the Appeals Office on August 20,
2002, petitioner submitted an amended offer in compromise in the
amount of $9,756. Petitioner’s transmittal letter indicated that
he believed that his options were to appeal within 30 days to the
Office of Appeals or to submit another offer, based on
instructions in the Form 656 package. Petitioner also suggested
that the revenue officer’s method of calculating income did not
consider the expenses of running his business, as reflected on
his tax returns for 1999, 2000, and 2001.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011