- 7 -
legitimate concern of the taxpayer that the collection action be
no more intrusive than necessary. See sec. 6330(c)(3).
Section 6330(d) provides for judicial review of the
administrative determination in the Tax Court or a Federal
District Court, as may be appropriate. Where the validity of the
underlying tax liability is properly at issue, the Court will
review the matter de novo. Where the validity of the underlying
tax liability is not properly at issue, however, the Court will
review the Commissioner’s administrative determination for abuse
of discretion. Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181-182
(2000).
Here, petitioner does not seek to challenge his underlying
tax liabilities. He disputes only the rejection of his OIC. We
therefore review respondent’s determination for abuse of
discretion. See Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 183, 185
(2001).
Petitioner makes two main arguments. First, although he
acknowledges refusing to provide respondent with certain
financial information, petitioner claims that such information
was irrelevant to his OIC. Second, petitioner disputes the
determination that he was able to pay his tax liabilities in
full. In particular, petitioner challenges the statement in the
Appeals memorandum that his $4,200 line of credit constitutes an
asset available for collection.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011