- 6 - Petitioner did not receive a notice of deficiency for any of the years at issue. He therefore may challenge his underlying tax liabilities. We review respondent’s determination of petitioner’s underlying tax liabilities de novo. We review respondent’s nonliability administrative determinations for abuse of discretion. See Fishbach v. Commissioner, supra. 1. Petitioner’s Underlying Tax Liabilities Petitioner raises two challenges with respect to his underlying tax liabilities, both of which focus on the burden of proof. First, petitioner notes the liabilities at issue are self-assessed; i.e., they are based on petitioner’s tax returns. Because petitioner now disputes the accuracy of his returns, he appears to argue that the validity of his assessed tax liabilities is called into question. Petitioner believes respondent therefore must prove that the underlying tax liabilities are correct. We disagree. The Secretary shall assess all taxes determined by a taxpayer as shown on the taxpayer’s return. See sec. 6201(a)(1). Where a taxpayer later disputes his underlying tax liability in a lien or levy proceeding, the taxpayer generally bears the burden of proof. See Poindexter v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 280, 286 (2004), affd. 132 Fed. Appx. 919 (2d Cir. 2005); Horn v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-207. Thus, respondent properlyPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011