- 8 -
by the taxpayer at the hearing, and “whether any proposed
collection action balances the need for the efficient collection
of taxes with the legitimate concern of the * * * [taxpayer] that
any collection action be no more intrusive than necessary.” Sec.
6330(c)(3).
If the Commissioner issues a determination letter to the
taxpayer following an administrative hearing, the taxpayer may
file a petition for judicial review of the administrative
determination. Sec. 6330(d)(1); Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C.
35, 37 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 179 (2000).
We have jurisdiction over this matter because petitioner
filed a timely petition for review in response to respondent’s
valid notice of determination to proceed with collection. See
sec. 6330(d)(1); Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 159 (2001);
Sarrell v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 122 (2001); Sego v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Offiler v. Commissioner,
114 T.C. 492, 498 (2000); Hochschild v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2002-195. In a proceeding commenced under section 6330(d), the
Court applies a de novo standard to determine a taxpayer’s
underlying tax liability, when and if it is at issue, and an
abuse of discretion standard to review certain other
administrative determinations of the Commissioner. Sego v.
Commissioner, supra at 610.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011