- 6 -
informally suspended consideration of any offer-in-compromise
pending a determination of Barbara Drake’s request for innocent
spouse relief, which would influence whether petitioner filed an
individual offer-in-compromise or a joint offer-in-compromise.
By letter dated February 5, 2002, respondent made a
preliminary determination denying Barbara Drake’s request for
innocent spouse relief, and she appealed the determination to
respondent’s Appeals Office. The Appeals Office assigned Appeals
Officer Jeffrey Kaplan to the case.
On September 4, 2002, petitioner submitted to respondent’s
Appeals Office an “amended” Form 656, Offer-in-Compromise,
offering to pay $5,500 in satisfaction of petitioner’s tax
liabilities for 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1999.6
In a letter to petitioner dated September 4, 2002, Settlement
Officer O’Shea acknowledged receiving the amended offer-in-
compromise but noted that consideration of the original offer-in-
compromise had been informally suspended by the parties pending
the determination of Barbara Drake’s request for innocent spouse
relief. Accordingly, Settlement Officer O’Shea informed Mr.
Burke that no original offer-in-compromise had been submitted for
consideration and returned the amended Form 656 to Mr. Burke.
Petitioner concedes that the reason for returning the Form 656
was to avoid any administrative confusion.
6The tax years 1993 and 1999 were not within the scope of
the proposed levy nor part of the initial request for a sec. 6330
hearing.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011