Joseph A. Loftus - Page 7

                                        - 6 -                                         
          explained, petitioner argues that the IRS should be limited to              
          collecting half of the amount of the liability for which the                
          notice of lien was filed for 1996 and 1997.  In addition, he                
          objects to the failure to pay addition to tax and the interest              
          that accrued on the assessments after his bankruptcy action.  The           
          Court will treat petitioner’s arguments as challenges to the                
          collection action.                                                          
               Challenges to Collection Action                                        
               Questions about the appropriateness of the collection action           
          include whether it is proper for the Commissioner to proceed with           
          the collection action as determined in the notice of                        
          determination, and whether the type and/or method of collection             
          chosen by the Commissioner is appropriate.  See, e.g., Swanson v.           
          Commissioner, 121 T.C. 111, 119 (2003) (challenge to                        
          appropriateness of collection reviewed for abuse of discretion).            
               In order for a taxpayer to prevail under the abuse of                  
          discretion standard, it is not enough for the Court to conclude             
          that the Court would not have authorized collection; the Court              
          must conclude that, in authorizing collection, the Appeals                  
          officer has exercised discretion arbitrarily, capriciously, or              
          without sound basis in fact.  Estate of Jung v. Commissioner, 101           
          T.C. 412, 449 (1993); accord Mailman v. Commissioner, 91 T.C.               
          1079, 1084 (1988).  It has been held that discretion can be                 
          abused by neglecting a significant relevant factor, by giving               
          weight to an irrelevant factor, or by considering only the proper           

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011