James E. Anderson and Cheryl J. Latos - Page 11




                                       - 11 -                                         
               hearing and never received one.                                        
               Appeals has verified, or received verification, that                   
               applicable laws and administrative procedures have been                
               met, has considered the issues raised, and has balanced                
               the collection action with the legitimate concerns that                
               such action be no more intrusive than necessary as                     
               required by IRC 6330(c)(3).                                            
               Information in the case file shows that the Internal                   
               Revenue Service followed law and procedure in this                     
               case.  The liabilities were properly assessed.  Notice                 
               and demand was made and the assessments were not paid.                 
               IRC § 6330(c) allows the taxpayer to raise any relevant                
               issues relating to the unpaid tax on the proposed levy                 
               at the scheduled hearing.  On January 29, 2002 a hear-                 
               ing was held.  Only Cheryl Latos attended.  Discussions                
               centered on the validity of the liabilities, you es-                   
               chewed discussion of alternatives to the proposed                      
               enforced collection actions.                                           
               Issues raised by the taxpayer                                          
               You raised the issue of the validity of the assessment.                
               In this appeal, the issue involved the tax assessments                 
               for [inter alia] * * * 1998 * * *.  It related only to                 
               income tax.  The current tax assessed is not related to                
               self-employment.  Based upon the discussion at the                     
               hearing, held on January 29, 2002, you contend that Mr.                
               Anderson is an employee.  You indicate that it is the                  
               responsibility of the employer to withhold taxes.  The                 
               law does not support your position.  No withholding was                
               taken from the remuneration of Mr. Anderson.  No esti-                 
               mated payments were ever made for the years in ques-                   
               tion.  As previously cited above,  Church 810 F2nd 1987                
               87-1 USTC 1945 , the fact that an employer does not                    
               withhold does not lessen your obligation to pay the                    
               income tax.                                                            
               You raised no other issues at the hearing.  Attempts to                
               discuss collection alternatives were met with a nega-                  
               tive response.  A request for financial information                    
               that could facilitate alternatives was declined.  Your                 
               belief is that the liability issue should be resolved                  
               in your favor and collection alternatives would there-                 
               fore be unnecessary.                                                   







Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007