- 7 -
alleged nominee transfers of petitioner’s real property and
assets.
Petitioner timely petitioned the Tax Court for review of the
notice.
OPINION
When underlying taxes are not in dispute, as in the instant
case, we review respondent’s adverse CDP determinations for abuse
of discretion. Speltz v. Commissioner, 454 F.3d 782, 784-785
(8th Cir. 2006), affg. 124 T.C. 165 (2005); Sego v. Commissioner,
114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176,
181-182 (2000). Respondent will be regarded as abusing his
discretion when he acts without a sound basis in fact or law.
Freije v. Commissioner, 125 T.C. 14, 23 (2005); Woodral v.
Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 23 (1999).
In prior years, and with a great deal of effectiveness and
propriety, respondent’s Appeals officers generally were allowed
to communicate with respondent’s revenue agents and officers
concerning a taxpayer’s outstanding taxes.
In 1998, however, after a series of hearings relating to
respondent’s collection practices,4 Congress enacted and the
4 For news reporting on the 1997 and 1998 congressional
hearings on tax collection reform, see Taxes at the Top, The
Newshour with Jim Lehrer (PBS television broadcast Jun. 4, 2004)
(transcript available at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business
/jan-june04/tax_6-04.html).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011