- 7 -
Pursuant to section 6330(c)(2)(A), a taxpayer may raise at
the section 6330 hearing any relevant issue with regard to the
Commissioner’s collection activities, including spousal defenses,
challenges to the appropriateness of the Commissioner’s intended
collection action, and alternative means of collection. Sego v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 609 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114
T.C. 176, 180 (2000). Mr. and Mrs. Harris are not challenging
their underlying liabilities. See sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).
Therefore, we review respondent’s determination for an abuse of
discretion. See Sego v. Commissioner, supra at 610.
Respondent stated that the settlement officer considered Mr.
and Mrs. Harris’s second OIC as part of their section 6330
hearing. Respondent relies on Schenkel v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2003-37, for the proposition that there was no abuse of
discretion in this case. Schenkel, however, is distinguishable
from the case at bar.
In Schenkel, the Appeals officer received a completed Form
433-A directly from the taxpayer. The taxpayer listed his
assets, his monthly income, and his total monthly living
expenses. The Appeals officer reviewed the taxpayer’s OIC
considering all the financial information the taxpayer submitted.
The Appeals officer himself calculated the taxpayer’s total
allowable monthly living expenses. Upon an independent review of
the underlying documentation, the Appeals officer concluded that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011