- 6 - On April 7, 2006, respondent’s Appeals Office issued its notice of determination sustaining respondent’s notice of tax lien filing and rejecting petitioner’s OIC. Discussion Section 6330(c)(2)(A)(iii) permits a taxpayer to propose collection alternatives to the filing of a Federal tax lien. Rev. Proc. 2003-71, sec. 4.02(2), 2003-2 C.B. 517, 517, provides that an OIC based on doubt as to collectibility will be treated as an acceptable collection alternative only where the OIC reflects the reasonable collection potential from the taxpayer. Where a taxpayer has dissipated assets in disregard of the taxpayer’s outstanding Federal income taxes, the dissipated assets may be included in the calculation of the minimum amount that is to be paid under an acceptable OIC. Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) 5.8.5.4(5). A dissipated asset is defined as any asset (liquid or not liquid) that has been sold, transferred, or spent on nonpriority items and/or debts and is no longer available to pay the tax liability. Samuel v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-312; IRM 5.8.5.4(1). Our review of respondent’s adverse determination relating to petitioner’s proposed OIC focuses on whether respondent abused his discretion in rejecting petitioner’s OIC. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008