- 8 -
Petitioners claim they cannot fully pay the liability, but
the financial information submitted to the Appeals officer shows
assets and equity exceeding $1.15 million. The liabilities date
back to April 15, 1993, and petitioners have had a number of
years to liquidate part or all of their assets or borrow against
their equity. It is not an abuse of discretion for respondent to
require that taxpayers with sufficient assets to satisfy their
liabilities pay them off more rapidly than would be accomplished
by the proposed installment agreement. See Clawson v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-106.
Petitioners claim that they are entitled to an installment
agreement so that they can sell their properties in an “orderly
fashion”, but the Appeals officer was not given any assurances
that the sales would occur within a reasonable period of time,
and in light of petitioners’ apparent indifference to their past
income tax liabilities in this case, the action of the Appeals
officer is fully justified. Moreover, petitioners’ $100,000
payment subsequent to the Appeals hearing does not change our
holding, even if indeed it is relevant to our consideration of
this case. See Robinette v. Commissioner, 123 T.C. 85 (2004).
In any event, the $100,000 payment leaves a balance of at least
$500,000, a sum too large to be discharged within the collection
period by monthly installments of $1,500.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011