- 26 -
justify reversal or remand of the Appeals office determination.
See id. at 115, 116, 120 (Wells, Thornton, and Wherry, JJ.,
concurring, respectively). Accordingly, as stated, petitioner’s
testimony with respect to special circumstances is not admissible
because it is irrelevant.
3. Ms. Boudreau’s Trial Testimony
Petitioner wishes to introduce Ms. Boudreau’s trial
testimony to show infirmities in the determination, the hearing
record, and the Appeals procedures applicable to section 6330
hearings. Much of that testimony was in response to Mr. Burke’s
questions to Ms. Boudreau concerning the content of her case
activity record and how she arrived at her decision to reject the
offer in compromise. Among other things, Mr. Burke questioned
her as to abbreviations and notations in the case activity
record, her use of national standards for determining necessary
living expenses in evaluating offers in compromise, what factors
she took into account in rejecting the offer, and whether she
notified petitioner that he could appeal her decision to reject
the offer in compromise. On brief, petitioner catalogues the
infirmities that he claims justify Ms. Boudreau’s trial
testimony: The notice of determination fails to state what
“current IRS policy and procedures” were being relied on by Ms.
Boudreau and whether she rejected the offer in compromise based
on doubt as to collectibility or effective tax administration.
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011