- 22 -
Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 410 (1971)) (other citations
omitted). We also observed that we regularly review
discretionary acts of the Government. Id. at 997 n.11. We also
explained that nothing suggested that the Government’s exercise
of discretion under section 6081 involves any agency expertise
beyond the competence of courts and that “‘No delicate political
or economic questions present themselves. To the contrary, we
need only ask whether * * * [the Government exercised its
discretion] in a rational, nonarbitrary, and regular fashion’.”
Id. at 998 (quoting Hondros v. U.S. Civil Serv. Commn., 720 F.2d
278, 294 (3d Cir. 1983)).
In this case, we do not need to decide whether all
determinations under section 6165 are reviewable. We are not
reviewing a determination made under section 6165. We are
reviewing respondent’s determination under section 6166. See
sec. 7479(a). We have already held that we have jurisdiction to
review all reasons for respondent’s determination that the estate
may not make an election under section 6166. Therefore,
respondent’s arguments relating to section 6165 are not
applicable.
We conclude that we have jurisdiction under section 7479 to
review respondent’s determination that the estate does not
qualify for the section 6166 election because the estate did not
meet respondent’s requirement of a bond or a special lien.
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007