- 20 -
supra); Olsen v. United States, supra at 155-156 (concluding that
an administrative record containing an offer-in-compromise, the
Appeals officer’s communications and the taxpayer’s responses,
and the Appeals officer’s conclusions was sufficient); see also
Robinette v. Commissioner, supra at 461-462 (agreeing with Olsen
v. United States, supra).
A similar conclusion is warranted with respect to
petitioners’ related assertion that the notices of determination
are too vague and conclusory to comport with, and to facilitate
judicial review consistent with, due process. Petitioners
complain that the notices lack a cogent explanation of the
Appeals officer’s analysis showing how he considered and weighed
all of the evidence and issues raised by petitioners.
Section 6330(c)(3) provides that a determination for
purposes of the statute must take into account: (1) Verification
that requirements of applicable law and procedure have been met;
(2) issues raised by the taxpayer at the hearing; and (3) whether
the proposed collection action balances the need for efficient
collection with concern that collection be no more intrusive than
necessary. Regulations elaborate as follows:
The Notice of Determination will set forth Appeals’
findings and decisions. It will state whether the IRS
met the requirements of any applicable law or
administrative procedure; it will resolve any issues
appropriately raised by the taxpayer relating to the
unpaid tax; it will include a decision on any
appropriate spousal defenses raised by the taxpayer; it
will include a decision on any challenges made by the
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011