- 12 - 6330(c)(2); Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 180-181 (2000). Moreover, petitioner would also be barred from litigating a second time his 1991 income tax liability based on the principles of res judicata. Our consideration in this case is therefore limited solely to the question of whether there was an abuse of discretion in respondent’s determination to proceed with collection action and in particular to file an NFTL. Where the underlying tax liability is not at issue, the Court will review the Appeals officer’s determination for abuse of discretion. Sego v. Commissioner, supra. In this case, petitioner’s 1991 tax liability was assessed in accord with the decision of this Court. Property and rights to property of petitioner become subject to a lien arising in favor of the United States at the time of the assessment because petitioner failed to pay the tax liability after notice and demand for payment. Secs. 6321 and 6322. The lien is not entitled to priority5 with respect to the claims of certain other creditors of petitioner until an NFTL is filed. Sec. 6323(a). As of January 31, 2006, petitioner’s outstanding balance due for his 1991 tax liability, including penalties and interest to 5 “Priority” used in this context refers to respondent’s claim or right to payment vis-a-vis other creditors’ claims against petitioner’s property or rights to property.Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007