- 6 -
Petitioner had the opportunity to challenge the correctness
of her tax liability for 2002 but instead chose not to petition
this Court in response to the June 8, 2004, notice of deficiency.
Therefore, petitioner’s underlying tax liability for 2002 is not
properly in issue, and we review respondent’s determination to
proceed with collection for an abuse of discretion.
The record in the instant case demonstrates that the only
issues petitioner raised throughout the section 6330
administrative process, in her petition to this Court, and in her
response, as supplemented, to respondent’s motion for summary
judgment and to impose a penalty pursuant to section 6673, were
frivolous tax protester type arguments. We do not address
petitioner’s frivolous arguments with somber reasoning and
copious citations of precedent, as to do so might suggest that
these arguments possess some degree of colorable merit. See
Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984).
The record in the instant case demonstrates that
respondent’s Appeals officer was impartial, had no prior
involvement with petitioner, and verified that all applicable
laws and administrative procedures were followed. Accordingly,
we hold that respondent’s determination to proceed with the
proposed levy to collect petitioner’s tax liability for 2002 was
not an abuse of discretion and that no genuine issue of material
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011