- 9 -
transcripts attached to the motion for summary judgment and in
the notice of determination, and that the requisite notices had
been sent to petitioner. Ms. Chadwell also considered
petitioner’s argument and rejected it as not relevant and
frivolous. Following the hearing, Ms. Chadwell made a
determination upholding the proposed levy action, after
concluding that the proposed levy action appropriately balanced
the need for efficient collection of taxes with petitioner’s
concerns regarding the intrusiveness of the proposed levy action.
In an addendum to his petition, petitioner listed the
following reasons why the proposed levy should not be sustained:
(1) Respondent issued “arbitrary legal opinions” in that:
(a) Respondent determined that petitioner had not made
a timely hearing request under section 6330;
(b) despite repeated requests, respondent failed to
produce any facts to support his opinion that petitioner was a
taxpayer;
(c) petitioner was not permitted to inquire at the
hearing what in the Constitution created his alleged obligation
to file a return and pay tax;
(d) there is no evidence that the law created any
obligation to file a return and pay tax;
(2) respondent asserted the same arguments in motions to
dismiss filed in other cases;
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011