- 7 - 48 months was approximately $24,000 ($501 x 48 = $24,048),8 and that petitioners’ reasonable collection potential was $163,617 (future income potential of $24,000 + net realizable equity of $139,617). As an alternate calculation, Cochran took into account petitioners’ $500 other expense (so as to eliminate any consideration of future income potential) and recomputed their reasonable collection potential at their net realizable equity of $139,617.9 Cochran performed the alternate calculation because she believed that the “other expense” could represent an otherwise allowable expense such as attorney’s fees, although not reported as such. On May 12, 2005, Appeals issued petitioners the notice of determination sustaining the proposed levy. The notice concludes that petitioners’ $32,000 offer-in-compromise is not an appropriate collection alternative to the proposed levy. The notice, quoting in part Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) section 5.8.11.2.2.3, states that petitioners’ offer does not meet the Commissioner’s guidelines for consideration of an offer-in- compromise due to doubt as to collectibility with special circumstances. The notice, citing IRM sections 5.8.11.1.2 and 8 Cochran used a 48-month factor because petitioners were offering to compromise their tax liability by paying cash. See Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) sec. 5.8.5.5. 9 Cochran noted that the alternate calculations would be $131,617 and $107,617 were she to take into account the $32,000 proposed offer.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011