- 7 -
challenges to the appropriateness of collection actions, and
collection alternatives. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(A). The person may
challenge the existence or amount of the underlying tax if the
person did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for the
tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute
the tax liability. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).
Where the validity of the underlying tax liability is
properly in issue, the Court will review the matter de novo.
Where the validity of the underlying tax is not properly in
issue, however, the Court will review the Commissioner’s
administrative determination for abuse of discretion. Sego v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114
T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000).
Petitioner did not dispute at his Appeals hearing that he
received the notices of deficiency. Petitioner argued, during
the Appeals hearing and throughout the administrative process
with the IRS, that he did not have taxable income under sections
861, 911, and section 1.861-8(a)(4), Income Tax Regs. That
argument has been rejected by every court that has addressed the
issue and is the type of frivolous argument that wastes the
Court’s time and resources.4 We do not address petitioner’s
4 In two letters to respondent dated July 31 and Sept. 16,
2002, petitioner claims that he is not a tax protester and that
he has never made a ridiculous claim regarding the law.
Petitioner informed respondent that he was a member of N.I.T.E.
(continued...)
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