- 14 -
that the issuance of the notices of determination to petitioner
violated the automatic stay.7
Our holding on this point is consistent with both bankruptcy
caselaw and respondent’s administrative guidance. See In re
Parker, 279 Bankr. 596, 602-603 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2002) (The IRS
conceded, and the bankruptcy court held, that the issuance of a
final notice of intent to levy under section 6330 violated the
automatic stay); In re Covington, 256 Bankr. 463, 465-466 (Bankr.
D.S.C. 2000) (The bankruptcy court held that the issuance of a
final notice of intent to levy under section 6330 violated the
automatic stay); see also Chief Counsel Advisory 2000-18-005 (May
5, 2000) (A Final Notice of Intent to Levy issued to a debtor who
had filed a bankruptcy petition violated the automatic stay and
was void).
Collection activity undertaken in violation of the automatic
stay generally is considered void and without effect. See 9B Am.
Jur. 2d, Bankruptcy, sec. 1756, at 387 (1999). Accordingly, we
conclude that the notices of determination issued to petitioner
7Despite the express exception permitting the Commissioner
to issue to a taxpayer a notice of deficiency under 11 U.S.C.
sec. 362(b)(9)(B) (2000), there is no exception in 11 U.S.C. sec.
362(b) (2000) for the issuance of a notice of determination under
sec. 6330. In addition, a notice of determination issued
pursuant to sec. 6330 does not qualify as an audit, a request for
a tax return, or an assessment or notice and demand for payment
within the meaning of the applicable subparagraphs of 11 U.S.C.
sec. 362(b)(9) (2000). See In re Covington, 256 Bankr. 463, 465-
466 (Bankr. D.S.C. 2000).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011