- 7 -
Rehm did not receive a copy of the October 27, 2004, notice of
deficiency. Petitioners allege that because they executed a
power of attorney placing Mr. Rehm in charge of all matters
relating to their 2001 tax year, respondent erred by not sending
him a copy of the notice.4
Petitioners’ argument is without merit. The power of
attorney designated Mr. Rehm as petitioners’ representative and
authorized him to receive copies of communications sent by
respondent to petitioners. However, the power of attorney
specified that respondent would send all original communications
to petitioners. Under like circumstances we have held that the
failure to mail a copy of the notice of deficiency to a
taxpayer’s representative is not fatal to the validity of the
notice. McDonald v. Commissioner, 76 T.C. 750, 753 (1981); Allen
v. Commissioner, 29 T.C. 113, 117 (1957). Section 6212 requires
only that the Secretary mail the notice of deficiency by
certified or registered mail to the taxpayer’s last known
address. A notice of deficiency is valid if it is mailed
directly to a taxpayer at the taxpayer’s last known address, even
if the taxpayer directs that a copy of all communications be sent
to the taxpayer’s representative and no copy of the deficiency
4 We shall assume for purposes of this discussion that the
Form 2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative,
signed by Mrs. Bond and Mr. Rehm on Oct. 12, 2004, is valid
despite petitioner Craig Bond’s failure to sign it.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007