- 31 -
review. See Fed. R. Evid. 403; cf. Olsen v. United States, 414
F.3d 144, 155 (1st Cir. 2005).
Petitioner complains that the records provided by respondent
contain no information on national or local living expense
standards. While that is true, the Internal Revenue Manual,
which is available to petitioner on the IRS Web site,9 discusses
the national standards, local standards, and other bases for
determining allowable expenses when evaluating offers in
compromise. See, e.g., IRM secs. 5.8.5.5.1 through 5.8.5.5.3
(Sept. 1, 2005). Moreover, as described supra, Ms. Boudreau
allowed in full petitioner’s validly claimed expenses. An
Appeals officer does not abuse her discretion when she allows a
taxpayer’s claimed expenses. See Schulman v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2002-129. Ms. Boudreau’s testimony describing national or
local expense standards is, therefore, irrelevant. See Fed. R.
Evid. 401.
In summary, we shall allow into evidence Ms. Boudreau’s
testimony explaining notations and abbreviations in her case
activity report and exclude the remainder of her testimony.
D. Conclusion
Respondent’s objection to the admission of petitioner’s
testimony is sustained. Respondent’s objection to the admission
9 See supra note 2.
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011