- 20 -
Instead, petitioner asserted that his expenses were too low and
that he was taxed using the incorrect rate of tax. Petitioner
also informed respondent’s Appeals officer that he could not pay
the income taxes, interest, and penalties assessed for 1990,
1991, and 1992. During the telephone discussions, petitioner and
the Appeals officer did not discuss collection alternatives.
By letter dated January 11, 2000, the Appeals officer
confirmed that a telephone conference had occurred, and the
Appeals officer canceled the proposed face-to-face meeting. The
letter also contained respondent’s proposed findings and invited
petitioner to contact the Appeals officer to arrange further
telephone discussions if he had any questions. Petitioner did
not contact the Appeals officer after receiving the January 11,
2000, letter. On March 23, 2000, respondent issued a Notice of
Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320
and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his unpaid income taxes for
1989, 1990, 1991, and 1992.
OPINION
I. Burden of Proof
Generally, the Commissioner’s determinations in a notice of
deficiency are presumed to be correct, and the taxpayer bears the
burden of proving that the Commissioner’s determinations are
erroneous. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115
(1933).
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