Laura K. Davis, et al. - Page 18

                                       - 18 -                                         
          public accountant, forensic accountant, and certified fraud                 
          examiner.  She is not, however, a certified public accountant,              
          nor is she licensed by the State of Colorado to practice                    
          accounting.  She has never been employed by the IRS, and is not             
          an enrolled agent or otherwise authorized to represent taxpayers            
          before the IRS pursuant to Treasury Department Circular No. 230,            
          Practice Before the Internal Revenue Service, 31 C.F.R. Part 10             
          (Rev. 6-2005).  Among other things, she testified to the                    
          following:  She had told Mr. Jones that the assessments of tax in           
          these cases with respect to the taxable years in issue of both              
          Mr. and Ms. Davis were time barred.  The date of assessment of              
          tax is the date an officer of the IRS signs a summary record of             
          assessment.  The data necessary to compile a summary record of              
          assessment, however, is only available for that purpose after it            
          has been posted to the IRS’s master file system.  On the basis of           
          her examinations of transcripts of petitioners’ individual master           
          files for the years at issue, which revealed postings of                    
          assessments on dates subsequent to the assessment dates shown on            
          those transcripts, she had reached the conclusion that the                  
          assessment dates were not accurate and the true assessment dates            
          were the dates of the postings.                                             
               Both Mr. Jones and Ms. Lacorte were accorded the opportunity           
          to be heard with respect to our orders to show cause why excess             
          costs should not be imposed on them pursuant to section                     

Page:  Previous  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007