- 39 -
II. Section 301.6330-1(e), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
Before proceeding, it is necessary to comment on the
majority’s disposition of section 301.6330-1(e), Proced. & Admin.
Regs., set forth in pertinent part on page 9 of the majority’s
opinion. Subsection (e)(1) of that regulation states quite
clearly that, at a section 6330 (Collection Due Process (CDP)
hearing), the taxpayer “may raise challenges to the existence or
amount of the tax liability specified on the CDP Notice * * * if
the taxpayer did not receive a statutory notice of deficiency for
that tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to
dispute that tax liability.” (Emphasis added.) See also
subsection (e)(3), Q&A-E2 (similar).2 The pertinent language of
subsection (e)(1) of the regulation is essentially the same as
the language of section 6330(c)(2)(B) except that, in the
regulation, the term “tax liability specified on the CDP Notice”
is substituted for the term “underlying tax liability”. Thus,
the drafters of the regulation fixed the meaning of the term
“underlying tax liability” as “the tax liability specified on the
CDP Notice”.
As the majority recites, on March 19, 2002, respondent
issued to petitioners a final notice (CDP notice) stating that
petitioners owed tax, penalties, and interest (for 2002) totaling
2 Sec. 301.6320-1(e)(1), (3), Q&A-E2, Proced. & Admin.
Regs., is similar but relates to liens rather than levies.
Page: Previous 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011