- 11 -
OPINION
I. Standard of Review
Because the underlying tax liability is not at issue, this
Court’s review under section 6330 is for abuse of discretion.
See Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 182 (2000). This standard does not
require the Court to decide whether petitioner’s offer-in-
compromise should have been accepted, but whether respondent’s
rejection of the offer was arbitrary, capricious, or without
sound basis in fact or law. See Woodral v. Commissioner, 112
T.C. 19, 23 (1999); Keller v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-166;
Fowler v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-163.
II. Petitioner’s Offer-in-Compromise
Section 7122(a) provides that “The Secretary may compromise
any civil * * * case arising under the internal revenue laws”.
Whether to accept an offer-in-compromise is left to the
Secretary’s discretion. Fargo v. Commissioner, 447 F.3d 706, 712
(9th Cir. 2006), affg. T.C. Memo. 2004-13; sec. 301.7122-1(c)(1),
Proced. & Admin. Regs.
The regulations under section 7122 set forth three grounds
for the compromise of a tax liability: (1) Doubt as to
liability; (2) doubt as to collectibility; or (3) promotion of
effective tax administration (ETA). Sec. 301.7122-1(b), Proced.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011