- 7 -
sent to the appropriate IRS service center, as the IRS required,
see Rev. Proc. 90-18, sec. 4.02, 1990-1 C.B. 491, 492, and it
definitely showed a different address.5
Respondent chose not to file a reply brief and so missed his
chance to grapple with Rizzo and Johnson. Instead, he argues
that petitioner’s proposed test leaves out a critical fourth
element: An express statement of intent by a taxpayer that his
address of record be changed to his new address. See Rev. Proc.
90-18, sec. 5.04(1), 1990-1 C.B. at 494.6 This failure, which
respondent strongly suggests could easily have been cured by
using Form 8852--the IRS’s official change-of-address form--in
his view vitiates petitioner’s attempt to use a Form 2848 to
effect a change of address.
Respondent finds this fourth element not in any case
involving powers of attorney, but in other cases stating
seemingly broad principles of “last known address” law. He
begins with Alta Sierra Vista v. Commissioner, 62 T.C. 367, 374
(1974), a case where we noted that “Administrative realities
5 Respondent suggests that petitioner could have given the
form to the revenue agent working on the audit. This is true,
but hardly decisive--respondent’s own procedure allows a taxpayer
to mail the form to the Service Center that received his last
return.
6 Note that we have held that revenue procedures generally,
and Rev. Proc. 90-18, supra, in particular, do not bind this
Court. Westphal v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-599.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011