- 18 -
brief suggest that the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
knowingly wrote its opinion in Fargo in such a way as to
distinguish that case from the cases of counsel’s similarly
situated clients (e.g., petitioners), and otherwise to allow
those clients to receive an abatement of their liability
attributable to partnerships such as those here, we do not read
the opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in
Fargo to support that conclusion.
Third, petitioners argue that Cochran inadequately
considered their unique facts and circumstances. We disagree.
Cochran reviewed and considered all information given to her by
petitioners. On the basis of the facts and circumstances of
petitioners’ case as they had been presented to her, Cochran
determined that petitioners’ offer did not meet the applicable
guidelines for acceptance of an offer-in-compromise due to doubt
as to collectibility with special circumstances or to promote
effective tax administration. We find no abuse of discretion in
that determination. Nor do we find that Cochran inadequately
considered the information actually given to her by petitioners.
In fact, Cochran computed petitioners’ future income potential by
using the same income figures that petitioners reported on their
Form 433-A, and the reported item of income was a type of
retirement income that could reasonably be expected to remain
constant over the next 48 months. The record also shows that
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011