- 7 -
Therefore, we review the Appeals office’s determination for an
abuse of discretion. Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 183, 185
(2001); Nicklaus v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 117, 120 (2001); see
Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000).
Petitioner alleges that respondent coerced him into signing
the Form 4549-CG, which waived the restrictions on assessment for
1996 and 1997. If a taxpayer signs a waiver under duress or
coercion, the waiver is invalid. Diescher v. Commissioner, 18
B.T.A. 353, 358 (1929). However, where respondent threatens to
take legally authorized actions if a taxpayer does not sign a
waiver, neither duress nor coercion exist, and the waiver is
valid. See Ballard v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-471, affd.
851 F.2d 359 (5th Cir. 1988); Price v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1981-693, affd. without published opinion 742 F.2d 1460 (7th Cir.
1984).
Petitioner claims he felt he had no other choice but to
sign the waiver. However, he provided no evidence of duress,
coercion, fraud, or misrepresentation in this case. The
examining officer’s conduct does not approach conduct which we
have found to constitute duress. See Diescher v. Commissioner,
supra (threat to impose fraud penalties if taxpayer did not sign
waiver constituted duress); Robertson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1973-205 (threat to seize taxpayer’s house if he did not sign a
form constituted duress). By informing petitioner that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011