- 6 -
Petitioners submitted an offer in compromise to respondent
in late April or early May 2000. Respondent returned it to
petitioners on May 3, 2000, because petitioners had not filed a
return for 1998. Petitioners resubmitted their offer in
compromise on May 13, 2000, with their tax return for 1998. In
the resubmitted offer in compromise, petitioners proposed to pay
$2,500 to settle their 1991-95 tax liabilities.
On a date not stated in the record, petitioner called Davis
to ask about the status of petitioners’ case. He learned that
Davis was on maternity leave and that Phyllis McLaughlin
(McLaughlin) was responsible for petitioners’ case. Petitioner
spoke with McLaughlin many times.
One of respondent’s employees (not identified in the record)
told petitioner that respondent was returning petitioners’ offer
in compromise because petitioner had apparently included his
business gross receipts in his personal income. The employee
told petitioner to separate his personal and business items so
that respondent’s evaluators would not assume that petitioner’s
income included his business gross receipts. McLaughlin
suggested to petitioners that they seek help from an accountant
to separate those items. Petitioners retained John Holder
(Holder).
R. Chambers (Chambers), a member of respondent’s collection
division in Melbourne, Florida, faxed to petitioners on July 27,
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