Ronald Lee Snyder - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
               III. Balancing the Need for Efficient Collection with the              
                    Taxpayer’s Concern that the Collection Action be no               
                    More Intrusive than Necessary                                     
               Has efficient tax collection been balanced with concern                
               regarding intrusiveness of the proposed collection                     
               action?                                                                
               IRC �6330 requires that the Settlement Officer consider                
               whether any collection action balances the need for                    
               efficient collection of taxes with the taxpayer’s                      
               legitimate concern that any collection action be no                    
               more intrusive than necessary.                                         
               The taxpayer has not participated meaningfully in                      
               trying to resolve his tax liability and has insisted                   
               instead on using frivolous arguments, which have re-                   
               peatedly been dismissed by the courts.                                 
               Appeals sustains Collection’s decision to file the                     
               NFTL.                                                                  
               On March 25, 2003, respondent issued to petitioner a deci-             
          sion letter concerning equivalent hearing under section 6330                
          (decision letter) with respect to the notice of intent to levy.             
          That letter stated in pertinent part:                                       
               We have reviewed the proposed collection action for the                
               period(s) shown above [including 1994, 1996, 1998, and                 
               1999].  This letter is our decision on your case.  A                   
               summary of our decision is stated below and the en-                    
               closed statement shows, in detail, the matters we                      
               considered at your Appeals hearing and our conclusions.                
               Your due process hearing request was not timely filed                  
               within the time prescribed under Section 6330.  How-                   
               ever, you received a hearing equivalent to a due pro-                  
               cess hearing except that there is no right to dispute a                
               decision by the Appeals Office in court under IRC                      
               section 6330.                                                          
               A statement attached to the decision letter provided in                
          pertinent part:                                                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011