John J. Delgado - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         
               On July 2, 2004, Settlement Officer Feist called petitioner            
          because he had received a letter dated June 28, 2004, from                  
          petitioner requesting feedback on the fax.  As of July 2, 2004,             
          Settlement Officer Feist had not received from petitioner any               
          listing of relevant issues that petitioner wished to discuss at             
          the section 6330 hearing.  During the call on that date                     
          petitioner stated that he was out of town without access to his             
          files and he would call Settlement Officer Feist on July 6, 2004,           
          with the relevant issues he wished to discuss.  Settlement                  
          Officer Feist offered petitioner the opportunity for a                      
          correspondence or telephonic section 6330 hearing on July 8,                
          2004, as petitioner had not provided him with any relevant issues           
          to discuss at the section 6330 hearing.                                     
               On July 7, 2004, Settlement Officer Feist received two phone           
          messages and a fax from petitioner.  Petitioner raised issues               
          regarding respondent’s notices’ not having the force and effect             
          of law and respondent’s authority to send notices to him.  That             
          same day, Settlement Officer Feist telephoned petitioner about              
          his aforementioned arguments and informed petitioner that all               
          laws and administrative procedures had been complied with.                  
          Petitioner’s response was a frivolous argument, and Settlement              
          Officer Feist noted to petitioner that his argument was addressed           
          on page 42 of “The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments” that he             
          had provided to petitioner.  Settlement Officer Feist denied                

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011