Tim W. Holliday - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         
          Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 37 (2000); Goza v.                      
          Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 179-180 (2000).  Section 6330(c)(2)             
          specifies issues that the taxpayer may raise at the hearing.  The           
          taxpayer may raise "any relevant issue relating to the unpaid tax           
          or the proposed levy" including spousal defenses, challenges to             
          the appropriateness of collection actions, and alternatives to              
          collection.  Sec. 6330(c)(2)(A).  The taxpayer also may challenge           
          the underlying tax liability if the taxpayer did not receive a              
          statutory notice of deficiency or did not otherwise have an                 
          opportunity to dispute the tax liability.  Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).              
          Section 6330(c)(3) provides that the determination of the Appeals           
          officer shall take into consideration, inter alia, the issues               
          raised by the taxpayer.  We review the determination de novo when           
          the underlying tax liability is in dispute, Goza v. Commissioner,           
          supra at 181-182, and under an abuse of discretion standard when            
          it is not, Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza             
          v. Commissioner, supra at 182.                                              
               Two of the principal arguments petitioner raises are that he           
          did not receive the hearing to which he was entitled under                  
          section 6330 because he was not permitted to record the hearing             
          and that the Appeals officer refused to consider arguments                  
          pertaining to the underlying tax liabilities (because petitioner            
          reported those liabilities as due on his returns).  The hearing             
          in this case was conducted, and the determination issued, before            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011