- 9 -
and circumstances of the taxpayer’s case are considered and the
taxpayer is permitted “to retain sufficient funds to pay basic
living expenses.” Sec. 301.7122-1(c)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
The Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) contains guidelines for
rejection of offers-in-compromise. IRM sec. 5.8.7.6(5) (Nov. 15,
2004), which respondent relied on in rejecting petitioner’s
offer, states:
An offer rejection may also be based on a determination
that acceptance of the specific offer at hand is not in
the "best interest of the government", per policy
statement P-5-100. Rejections under this provision
should not be routine and should be fully supported by
the facts outlined in the rejection narrative. Offers
rejected under this section require the review and
approval of the second level manager; that is,
Territory Manager for the field or Department Manager
for COIC [Centralized Offers in Compromise]. Examples
of situations that may warrant rejection as not being
in the "best interest of the government" include:
Recent compliance satisfies offer processability
criteria, however the taxpayer has an egregious history
of past non-compliance and our analysis of his current
finances reveals that it will be highly unlikely the
taxpayer will be able to remain in compliance during
the offer terms.
Policy statement P-5-100 (Jan. 30, 1992), on which the IRM
relies, states:
The Service will accept an offer in compromise when it
is unlikely that the tax liability can be collected in
full and the amount offered reasonably reflects
collection potential. An offer in compromise is a
legitimate alternative to declaring a case currently
not collectible or to a protracted installment
agreement. The goal is to achieve collection of what
is potentially collectible at the earliest possible
time and at the least cost to the Government.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011