- 10 - their monthly income exceeded their necessary living expenses, thereby allowing the full payment of their liabilities. In reviewing petitioners’ OIC, we note that the Settlement officer used information that was favorable to petitioners. For example, the Settlement officer allowed petitioners monthly living expenses that exceeded the amount they claimed on their Form 433-A, Collection Information Statement For Individuals. Moreover, in determining petitioners’ income, the Settlement officer used income figures that were less than those actually reported by petitioners. Notwithstanding his use of these favorable estimates, the Settlement officer still concluded that petitioners could pay their entire tax liabilities in full. We have reviewed the entire record, including the financial information presented to the Settlement officer, and cannot find that the Settlement officer’s determination rejecting petitioners’ OIC was an abuse of discretion. See Van Vlaenderen v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-346; Crisan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-318; Willis v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-302. Accordingly, collection by levy of petitioners’ unpaid tax liabilities reflected in the Determination Notices may proceed. To reflect the foregoing, Decisions will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Last modified: May 25, 2011