Robert Conde Del'Giudice - Page 8

                                        - 7 -                                         
               Petitioner objects to the appropriateness of the proposed              
          collection action.  Questions about the appropriateness of the              
          collection action include whether it is proper for the                      
          Commissioner to proceed with the collection action as determined            
          in the notice of determination, and whether the type and/or                 
          method of collection chosen by the Commissioner is appropriate.             
          See, e.g., Swanson v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. 111, 119 (2003)                
          (challenge to appropriateness of collection reviewed for abuse of           
               In order for petitioner to prevail under the abuse of                  
          discretion standard, it is not enough for the Court to conclude             
          that the Court would not have authorized collection; the Court              
          must conclude that, in authorizing collection, the Appeals                  
          officer has exercised discretion arbitrarily, capriciously, or              
          without sound basis in fact.  Estate of Jung v. Commissioner, 101           
          T.C. 412, 452 (1993); accord Mailman v. Commissioner, 91 T.C.               
          1079, 1084 (1988).  It has been held that an agency can abuse its           
          discretion by neglecting a significant relevant factor, by giving           
          weight to an irrelevant factor, or by considering only the proper           
          factors but nevertheless making a clear error in judging their              
          weight.  Henry v. INS, 74 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 1996).                        
               Petitioner argues that he cannot pay any amount toward his             
          tax liabilities greater than his OIC.  The Appeals officer                  
          reviewed the financial information that petitioner submitted and            

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011