- 6 -
round-the-clock nursing care. They claim that such care is so
expensive (almost $90,000/year, by their estimate) that it would
cause them to wholly consume their liquid assets in 10 years.
They argue that respondent should have accepted their offer as a
viable alternative to a levy because of this foreseeable economic
hardship.
As we already noted, we look to respondent’s determination
for anything that runs counter to established law or suggests the
lack of a “sound basis in fact or law.” In that light, we
decline to second-guess his determination that petitioners’
resources are sufficient to warrant collection of the entire
outstanding liability. The record compiled by respondent
indicates that petitioners possess substantial wealth--over a
million dollars in total assets (if equity in real estate is
counted) and a large income even in their retirement. While
petitioners certainly present a legitimate view of their possible
future needs, we do not find that the record shows respondent to
have abused his discretion in concluding that petitioners can pay
their debt without suffering substantial economic hardship.
B. Exceptional Circumstances
Petitioners also renew here the arguments in favor of a
finding of “exceptional circumstances” that they made to
respondent. First, they contend the IRS had no justification for
its extraordinary delay in assessing their unpaid tax liability
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011