- 11 -
05L did not seek to challenge the underlying income tax
liabilities that respondent was seeking to collect.
Respondent moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as to
Mr. Salazar’s employment tax liabilities on the grounds that
respondent had never issued a notice of determination concerning
a collection action under section 6330 with respect to the
employment tax liabilities. In a Salazar v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2006-7, filed January 18, 2006, we found that no notice of
determination for purposes of section 6330 had been issued with
respect to petitioners’ employment tax liabilities and granted
respondent’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction with
respect to Mr. Salazar’s employment tax liabilities.3
In the interim, on June 20, 2005, the bankruptcy trustee
submitted to the bankruptcy court a Trustee’s Final Report and
Application for Compensation and Reimbursement (the final
report). In the final report, payment on respondent’s secured
claim of $19,915.40 was not allowed. Instead, payment on
respondent’s priority claim of $43,673.45 was allowed. On August
22, 2005, the bankruptcy trustee disbursed $17,834.51 to
respondent.
3Respondent also moved to dismiss on the grounds that the
Court lacked jurisdiction to hear any challenge to Mr. Salazar’s
employment tax liabilities. However, because respondent issued a
notice of determination with respect to Mr. Salazar’s employment
tax liabilities on Oct. 18, 2006, respondent admits that we now
have jurisdiction to review his determination under sec.
6330(d)(1). See Callahan v. Commissioner, 130 T.C. __ (2008).
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008