Joseph E. Lewis - Page 16




                                       - 16 -                                         
               The expansive Senate version provoked responses from the               
          Department of the Treasury and other representatives of the                 
          executive branch expressing concerns that under the Senate bill a           
          taxpayer could dispute, in a collection review proceeding, tax              
          liabilities that had been previously litigated.  See Statement of           
          Administration Policy, Executive Office of the President (Office            
          of Management and Budget), on H.R. 2676--Internal Revenue Service           
          Restructuring and Reform Act (Reported by the Senate Committee on           
          Finance) (May 5, 1998), reprinted in Tax Notes Today, 98 TNT                
          87-18 (May 6, 1998); Letter from Robert E. Rubin, Secretary of              
          the Treasury to William Archer, Chairman, Committee on Ways &               
          Means, U.S. House of Representatives (June 2, 1998), reprinted in           
          Tax Notes Today, 98 TNT 112-40 (June 11, 1998).                             
               The final version of the legislation, devised in conference,           
          added the language that a person may challenge the existence or             
          amount of the underlying liability for any tax period “if such              
          person did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for               
          such tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to              
          dispute such tax liability.”  While there is nothing explicit in            
          the committee reports to explain the added limitation, it is                
          reasonable to conclude that the conference committee was                    
          addressing the stated criticisms of allowing taxpayers multiple             
          opportunities for judicial review of their tax liability.  See              
          Montgomery v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. at 17 (Gale, J.,                       







Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007