William F. Middleton - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
          Proced. & Admin. Regs., which provides:                                     
               The taxpayer must be offered an opportunity for a                      
               hearing at the Appeals office closest to taxpayer’s                    
               residence, * * * .  If that is not satisfactory to the                 
               taxpayer, the taxpayer will be given an opportunity for                
               a hearing by correspondence or by telephone.  If that                  
               is not satisfactory to the taxpayer, the Appeals                       
               officer * * * will review the taxpayer’s request for a                 
               CDP hearing, the case file, any other written                          
               communications from the taxpayer * * * and any notes of                
               any oral communications with the taxpayer or the                       
               taxpayer’s representative.  Under such circumstances,                  
               review of those documents will constitute the CDP                      
               hearing for the purposes of section 6330(b).                           
               At trial, petitioner admitted he was aware Ms. O’Neal was              
          respondent’s representative handling his administrative hearing             
          request before the receipt of the notice of determination.                  
          Petitioner asserted in his petition and testified that Mr. Bailey           
          was in contact with Ms. O’Neal and Mr. Bailey attempted to have             
          Ms. O’Neal place petitioner in noncollectible status and faxed              
          some materials to her.                                                      
               The record is clear, contrary to the statement in the notice           
          of determination, that petitioner’s representative, Mr. Bailey,             
          contacted Ms. O’Neal.  However, petitioner admitted that he                 
          failed to complete a Form 433-A, Collection Information Statement           
          for Wage Earners and Self-Employed Individuals, which Mr. Bailey            
          had mailed to him and that Mr. Bailey did not submit an offer in            
          compromise on his behalf.  Moreover, there is no evidence in the            
          record which supports petitioner’s statement that materials were            
          faxed to Ms. O’Neal.  The only information Ms. O’Neal had                   







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007