- 9 -
defaulted offers”. Ms. Santino knew of the 5-year filing
requirement, but she did not know what years were covered by
petitioner’s offer-in-compromise. In her courtesy investigation
of petitioner’s offer-in-compromise, she did not look at the
transcripts for 1995, 1996, or 1997. She did not consider
petitioner’s pattern of filing his returns on or about October
15. Ms. Santino never spoke with petitioner or Mr. Coy.
On July 13, 2000, Ms. Santino sent petitioner a letter
declaring petitioner’s offer-in-compromise in default. The basis
for the default was that the IRS had not received petitioner’s
Form 1040 for 1998.
On September 28, 2000, the IRS issued a Final Notice--Notice
of Intent to Levy and Your Right to a Hearing.
On October 6, 2000, petitioner, through his authorized
representative Mr. Coy, filed a Form 12153, Request for a
Collection Due Process Hearing. Petitioner stated the basis for
the appeal as: “We do not believe the taxpayer owes the amounts
stated in the Notice of Intent to Levy and would like the
opportunity to resolve these matters at a Collection Due Process
Hearing.”
On January 10, 2001, Appeals Officer Troy C. Talbott of the
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, office sent Mr. Coy a letter identifying
the options available for resolution of petitioner’s tax
liability (such as full payment, installment agreement, offer-in-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011