Michael L. Widner - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
               instead simply attempted to carry forward with his                     
               frivolous arguments, so the hearing was terminated.                    
                  *       *       *       *       *       *       *                   
                                    MY EVALUATION                                     
               Review of the information stated above and now present                 
               in the administrative file shows the collection re-                    
               quirements for all applicable laws and administrative                  
               procedures have been met.  Assessments were performed                  
               and notice and demand was made.  The notice required by                
               section 6330 of the I.R.C. was subsequently issued to                  
               TP, allowing him his appeal.                                           
               However, there is information to show that not all the                 
               assessments were proper.  Specifically, as indicated                   
               above the penalty under section 6651(a)(2) was added to                
               the tax.  That penalty is for the failure to pay the                   
               tax shown on a return when filed. * * * Here, the                      
               appropriate penalty is actually that under section                     
               6651(a)(3).  That penalty is for failure to pay the                    
               liability when billed. * * * the penalty assessed under                
               [section] 6651(a)(2) should be removed at this time.                   
               * * *                                                                  
               Balancing the Need for Efficient Collection with Tax-                  
               payer Concerns                                                         
               Given that no timely, reasonable alternative to the                    
               proposed levy action has been suggested and that TP has                
               not presented anything more than frivolous arguments in                
               the matter, it is my opinion that the proposed collec-                 
               tion action balances the government’s need for effi-                   
               cient collection with the taxpayer’s concern that any                  
               collection action be no more intrusive than necessary.                 
               It is therefore concluded that the action should be                    
               allowed to continue.                                                   
               The Court may grant summary judgment where there is no                 
          genuine issue of material fact and a decision may be rendered as            
          a matter of law.  Rule 121(b); Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner,            
          98 T.C. 518, 520 (1992), affd. 17 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 1994).  We             

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011