Thomas Olan Maxton, Jr. - Page 10



                                       - 10 -                                         
               Hearings conducted under section 6330 are informal                     
          proceedings, not formal adjudications.  Katz v. Commissioner, 115           
          T.C. 329, 337 (2000); Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 41                
          (2000); Ho v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-41.  Taxpayers are              
          generally entitled to a face-to-face hearing at the Appeals                 
          Office nearest their residence.  Sec. 301.6320-1(d)(2), Q&A-D6              
          and D7, Proced. & Admin. Regs.  Where the taxpayer declines to              
          participate in a proffered face-to-face hearing, hearings may be            
          conducted by telephone or correspondence.  Katz v. Commissioner,            
          supra at 337-338; Ho v. Commissioner, supra; sec. 301.6320-                 
          1(d)(2), Q&A-D6 and D7, Proced. & Admin. Regs.  The Court of                
          Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, to which an appeal in this case              
          would lie, has held that a face-to-face hearing is not required             
          where the taxpayer’s proffered arguments are frivolous.  Burnett            
          v. Commissioner, No. 06-60908 (5th Cir., Apr. 12, 2007).                    
          Furthermore, once the taxpayer has been given reasonable                    
          opportunity for a hearing but has failed to avail himself of that           
          opportunity, we have approved the making of a determination to              
          proceed with collection on the basis of the Commissioner’s review           
          of the case file; i.e, in the absence of any hearing.  See, e.g.,           
          Ho v. Commissioner, supra; Taylor v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.               
          2004-25, affd. 130 Fed. Appx. 934 (9th Cir. 2005); Leineweber v.            
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-17; Armstrong v. Commissioner, T.C.           
          Memo. 2002-224.                                                             







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007