- 16 -
evidence to show how these procedures, or the effects therefrom,
had rendered him medically unable to work. Accordingly, we hold
that respondent’s Appeals Office did not act in an arbitrary or
capricious manner in sustaining the proposed levy action as there
was no evidence presented whereby the Appeals Office could
determine that the levy was unduly burdensome given petitioner’s
medical status.
With respect to petitioner’s argument that respondent’s
Appeals Office failed to appreciate fully petitioner’s monthly
expenses in the light of the monthly amount he was receiving from
his IRA, we are again unpersuaded by the lack of evidence
produced by petitioner in support of this claim. First,
petitioner only provided a scant, 3-month record vis-a-vis
photocopies of money orders, all of which appear to be notated to
correspond to the expenses as listed on his OIC Form 433-A in
anticipation of trial, none of which correspond in amount to the
amounts listed on Form 433-A. Second, we are unconvinced by the
letter purportedly written by petitioner’s mother that he had
been renting space in her home for the past 3 years and paying
her $300 per month in rent. Petitioner produced no receipts or
bank records to corroborate this claim. Moreover, while we are
convinced that petitioner did, in fact, live with his mother, we
are not persuaded that he was required to spend more than one-
half of his monthly income on rent, food, and clothing.
Accordingly, we hold that respondent’s Appeals Office did not act
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008