§6320 — Notice and opportunity for hearing upon filing of notice of lien

255 (2001), is overruled to the extent that it holds that Appeals is not authorized to waive the 30-day period under I.R.C.

485, 492-493 (2017), supplementing and overruling in part 147 T.C.

159, 164 (2001) (overruling a case that the Court had decided in the early stages ofits section 6320/6330jurisprudence).

Accordingly, we find this case distinguishable from Buffano.6 Petitioner makes a number ofarguments attacking respondent's basis for the underlying penalties, and arguing that the Letter 3172 it received did not comply with section 6320.

It is respondent's position that in a section 6320 or 6330 matter involving a section 6672 penalty it is not necessary under section 6330(c)(1) that the Appeals officer verify that the IRS complied with section 6751(b)(1). That is because, according to respondent, section 6751(b)(1) does not apply to a section 6672 penalty.

6320 and 6330. Furthermore, the newly enacted sec. 7482(b)(1)(G), providing proper venue for petitions under sec. 6320 or 6330 to the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the circuit in which is located the legal residence ofthe petitioner ifthe petitioner is an individual, is inapplicable in this case because it applies only for petitions filed after December 18, 2015.

Unlike the collection alternative in West, the collection alternative raised in petitioner's sec. 6320 hearing, i.e., the August 31 OIC, had not been considered in a previous hearing as it was still under appeal when the determination notice was issued.

In the instant case, unlike the Appeals officer in Gravette, Ms. Smeck initiated her review ofpetitioner's rejected OIC before she was assigned to handle petitioner's CDP hearing. Unlike the OIC appeal taxpayer in Gravette, petitioner's OIC appeal was an administrative proceeding that was separate from the CDP hearing. Accordingly, we conclude that Gravette is inapplicable to the facts before us.¹° Thirdly, respondent contends that the purpose ofsection 6320(b)(3) is to prevent an Appeals office

An "equivalent hearing" decision letter, unlike a notice of determination, generally does not constitute a "determination" for purposes ofsec. 6320 or 6330 and so does not provide the requisite basis for invoking this Court's jurisdiction under sec.

The - 7 - facts in the instant case are distinguishable from those in Kennedy .

- 30 - [*30] meaningful opportunityto substantiate their position, we need not decide at this time whether Zillow.com, or similar Web sites, are appropriate tools for determining the FMV ofreal property in the context ofsection 6320 hearings or otherwise.

6The record does not corroborate any illegal or improper acts on the part of MRG or IMR, and we express no opinion with respect to petitioner's assertion that MRG or IMR misappropriated petitioner's funds .

Their request stated that "We disagree with the determination of taxes and additions owed, and the calculations of the amounts, if any ." Before the hearing was scheduled, they submitted an OIC-DATL that covered not just 1999, but all tax years from 1997 through 2003, offering $18,699 to compromise their entire income tax liability for all t

We disagree with respondent’s claim that we lack jurisdiction as to the proposed levy determination.

Considering the foregoing, we hold that SO Megyesi did not abuse his discretion in rejecting the Company’s OIC and determining that the Company was ineligible for any other collection alternatives.

Tooke of his right to a hearing pursuant to section 6320.

Section 6320 requires the IRS to send notice to the taxpayer that it has filed the NFTL.

Section 6320 requires the IRS to send notice to the taxpayer that it has filed the NFTL.

Section 6320 requires the IRS to send notice to the taxpayer that it has filed the NFTL.

Section 6320 requires the IRS to send notice to the taxpayer that it has filed the NFTL.

Gayou timely filed a request for a collection due process (CDP) hearing pursuant to section 6320.

If a CDP hearing is requested pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, the hearing is to be conducted by Appeals to determine whether to sustain the proposed collection action.

Section 6320 Section 6320 requires the Commissioner to notify a taxpayer of the filing of an NFTL.

Section 6320 requires the IRS to send notice to the taxpayer that it has 7 At trial the IRS submitted transcripts of Zaimes’s 2010 through 2014 Forms 1040, “U.S.

Section 6320 Section 6320 requires the Commissioner to notify a taxpayer of the filing of an NFTL.

Section 6320 requires the Commissioner to notify a taxpayer of the filing of a notice of lien.

Section 6320 requires the Commissioner to notify a taxpayer of the filing of an NFTL.

The Determination In February 2015, respondent filed the NFTL and sent petitioner notice of the filing and of her right to a so-called collection due process (CDP) hearing pursuant to section 6320.

OIC Submission As part of its efforts to collect the Abrahams’ unpaid 2012-16 liabilities the IRS issued a notice informing them of the filing of an NFTL with respect to those years and apprising them of their right to request a CDP hearing pursuant to section 6320.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall notify the taxpayer in 2In pertinent part, sec.

- 9 - [*9] Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to the notice offiling ofan NFTL or a notice oflevy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

- 4 - [*4] and apprising her ofher right to request a CDP hearing pursuant to section 6320.

Biggs-Owens' unpaid 2013 and 2014 liabilities the IRS issued a notice informing her ofthe filing ofan NFTL with respect to those years and apprising her ofher right to request a CDP hearing pursuant to section 6320.

Rockafellor's agreed-upon liabilities for 2007, 2010, 2012, and 2013, the IRS issued a notice on August 24, 2017, that informed her ofthe filing ofan NFTL with respect to those years and apprised her ofher right to request a CDP hearing pursuant to section 6320.

Ifthe taxpayerrequests a CDP hearing pursuant to section 6320, the hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

This Court has consistentlyheld that a face-to-face hearing is not required pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, and a proper CDP hearing may be held by telephone or by correspondence under certain circumstances.

at 116-117, we held that "appeals officers" pursuant to section 6320 or 6330 were not "Officer[s] ofthe United States" because the position ofan Appeals officer was not '"established by Law' to which the * * * [Appointments Clause] applies" and "the CDP hearing officer does not exercise * * * 'significant authority'".

This Court has consistently held that a face-to-face CDP hearing is not required pursuant to section 6320 or 6330 and that a proper CDP hearing may be held by telephone or by correspondence under certain circumstances.

Pursuant to section 6320(a), the Commissioner must provide the person with written notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative hearing to review the propriety ofthe filing of the notice ofFederal tax lien.

While petitioner contends that he was denied a face-to-face collection due process hearing, this Court has consistently held that a face-to-face hearing is not required pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, and a proper collection due process hearing may be held by telephone or by correspondence under certain circumstances.

This Court has consistentlyheld that a face-to-face CDP hearing is not required pursuant to section 6320 or 6330 and a proper CDP hearing may occur by telephone or by correspondence under certain circumstances.

We hold that we shall sustain those determinations.

We hold that he is not.

We hold that they are.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayerwith written notice ofthe filing ofan NFTL and ofthe taxpayer's right to a hearing with Appeals concerning the lien.

We hold that they are.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayerwith written notice ofthe filing ofan NFTL and ofthe taxpayer's right to a hearing with Appeals concerning the lien.

We hold that we sustain those determinations.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayer with written notice ofthe filing ofa notice oflien and ofthe taxpayer's right to a hearing with Appeals concerning the lien.

Petitioner is entitled to only one hearing pursuant to section 6320, and it is proper that the Garvin County NFTL be the subject ofthe hearing and determination.

To the extent practicable, a hearing pursuant to section 6320 may be held in conjunction with a hearing held pursuant to section 6330.

Section 6320 requires the Commissioner to send written notice to the taxpayer ofthe filing ofan 7Sec.

To the extent practicable, a hearing pursuant to section 6320 may be held in conjunction with a hearing held pursuant to section 6330.

MEMORANDUM OPINION WELLS, Judge: Petitioner seeks review, pursuant to section 6320, of respondent's Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) sustaining the filing ofa notice ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) for petitioner's unpaid income tax liabilities for SERVED Jan 06 2016 - 2 - [*2] 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 20

OPINION Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to a lien or levy notice pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing, the hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals. Sec. 6320(b)(1). A hearing under section 6320 generally shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the procedures set forth - 5 - [*5] in section 6330(c), (d), and (e).

Because we hold for respondent on the basis ofour (continued...) - 11 - [*11] Section 6330(c)(2)(B) permits a taxpayerto challenge the existence or amount ofhis underlying liability in a CDP proceeding only ifthe taxpayer did not receive a notice ofdeficiency or otherwise have a prior opportunity to contest that

To the extent practicable, a hearing pursuant to section 6320 may be held in conjunction with a hearing held pursuant to section 6330.

Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to an NFTL or a notice oflevy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayer with written notice ofthe filing ofan NFTL and ofthe taxpayer's right to a hearing with Appeals concerning the lien.

Ifa taxpayer requests a hearing in response to an NFTL pursuant to section 6320, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe filing.

Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to an NFTL or a notice oflevy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to an NFTL pursuant to section 6320, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

Ifa taxpayer requests a hearing in response to a Letter 3172 pursuant to section 6320, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee of Appeals.

We hold that it did not.

Petitioner disputes a notice ofdetermination that Appeals issued embodying the results ofa CDP hearing pursuant to section 6320(b).

Section 6320 provides thatthe Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice ofthe filing ofa notice oflien under section 6323.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe NFTL filing.

Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to an NFTL or a notice oflevy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

In tJ1is collection due process (CDP) case, petitioner seeks review pursuant to section 6320(c) ofthe determination by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or respondent)touphold the filing ofa notice ofFederal tax lien.

We hold that he did not abuse his discretion in denying withdrawal ofthe lien but did abuse his discretion in denying collection alternatives.

We hold that respondent may calculate the amount ofthe penalty using the tax shown on the return giving rise to the violation ofthe disclosure obligation.

Pursuant to section 6320(a), the Commissionermust provide the taxpayerwith notice ofthe lien filing and an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe filing.

We hold that petitioner is liable for the penalty and that the Appeals Office properly sustainedthe collection action.

Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to an NFTL or a notice oflevy pursuantto section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals. Secs. 6320(b)(1), (3), 6330(b)(1), (3). The hearing under section 6320 generally shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the procedures set forth in section 6330(c), (d), and (e).

Collection Due Process Overview Section 6320 requires the Secretaryto notify a taxpayer in writing ofthe filing ofa notice oflien.9 The notice must.inform the taxpayer of.the right to request a hearing.'° Thehearings are often called collection due process, or CDP, .

- 9 - [*9] OPINION Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to an NFTL or a notice oflevy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

Consequently, we lackjurisdiction in this proceeding to review, in the first instance, the determinations that RO Wilborn made before petitioner even requested a hearing pursuant to section 6320.

MEMORANDUM'FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION LAUBER, Judge: In this collection due process (CDP) case, petitioner seeks review pursuant to section 6320(c) ofthe determination by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or respondent) to uphold the filing ofa notice ofa Federal SERVED Sep 24 2013 -2- [*2] tax lien.1 The IRS filed notice ofthis lien to assist in collecting petitioner's unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and

We hold that it was not.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayer with notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe filing.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe filing.

Abuse ofDiscretion Standard Ifthe Commissioner chooses to file an NFTL, section 6320 requires him to give the taxpayernotice ofthat filing and notice ofthe right to an administrative - 9 - [*9] hearing before an impartial officer ofthe IRS Appeals Office.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe filing.

In the absence ofa notice ofdetermination, however,.the Court lacksjurisdiction to - 10 - [*10] review the filing ofan NFTL or a proposed levy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330.

Ifa taxpayer requests a hearing in response to an NFTL or a notice oflevy i pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofAppeals.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an·administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe NFTL filing.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayer with notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe NFTL filing.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe NFTL filing.

- 11 - Ifa taxpayer requests a hearing in response to a notice ofFederal tax lien or a notice oflevy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employée ofthe Appeals Office.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe NFTL filing.

However, as the Appeals Office noted in the notice of determination, the regulations provide that, even ifnotice is not sent within the five-day period, "The validity and priority ofa NFTL is not conditioned on notification to the taxpayerpursuant to section 6320.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish written notice ofthe filing ofa Federal tax lien under section 6321.

Determination To Sustain the Notice ofFederal Tax Lien Ifa taxpayerrequests a hearing in response to a notice ofFederal tax lien or a notice oflevy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held.before an impartial officer or employee ofthe IRS Office ofAppeals.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe NFTL filing.

The CAP letter did not purport to be a notice ofdetermination pursuant to section 6320 or 6330.

Determination To Sustain the Proposed Levy Action and the Notice of Federal Tax Lien Ifa taxpayer requests a hearing in response to a notice ofFederal tax lien or a notice oflevy pursuant to section 6320 or 6330, a hearing shall be held before an impartial officer or employee ofthe IRS Office ofAppeals.

Pursuant to section 6320(a) the Commissioner must provide the taxpayerwith notice ofand an opportunity for an administrative review ofthe propriety ofthe NFTL filing.

Bedause"the mitigation provisions of sections 1311-1314 do not apply, -we hold that petitioner' s time-barred overpayment T claims for nondetermination years are not allowable as credits againstathe 1993 liability.

A trial was held on-May 24, 2010, in Mobile, Alabama. OPINION Section 6320(a) and (b) provides that a taxpayer shall be notified.in writing by the Commissioner of the filing of sa notice of Federal.tax lien.and provided with an opportunity for am administrative hearing. An administrative hearing under section 6320 is conducted in accordance with the procedural requirements of section 6330.

OPINION DAWSON, Judge: This collection caše is before the Court on respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of.jurisdiction on the ground that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Office of Appeals (the Appeals Office) did not issue petitioners a notice of determination pursuant to section 6320 or 6330.1 Respondent contends that the Appeals Office determined that petitioners' requests for an administrative hearing in their entirety met the Section references are to the Internal Revenue Code.

Similarly, section 6320 provides that after the filing of an NFTL under section 6323, the Secretary shall furnish written notice of the filing and of the taxpayer's right to fa hearing, which is generally conducted consistent with the procedures set forth in section 6330(c), (d), and (e).

We hold that the Office of Appeals did not abuse its discretion in rejecting Mr.

Pursuant to section 6320, Eric Lynn Tracy seeks our review of a determination concerning the filing of a notice of federal tax lien to collect his unpa d 2008 federal income-tax liability.

We hold it was not .

Tucker's cross motion for summary judgment asking that we hold'that the supplementalnotice reflected an abuse of discretion by the Office of Appeals .

Pursuant to section 6320(b)(2), a taxpayer is entitled to only one hearing regarding the tax period relating to the amount of unpaid tax.

Accordingly, we hold that this Court lacks jurisdiction on the ground that the NFTL was invalid .

below in parts II .C, II .D, and II.E .) Additionally, the taxpayer may contest the existence and amount of the underlying tax 10To the extent practicable, a CDP hearing concerningl.a lien under section 6320 is to be held in conjunction with a CDP hearing concerning'a levy under section 6330, and the conduct of the lien hearing is to be in accordance with the relevant, provisions of section 6330 .

Section 6320 provides"that the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayer with written notide of..the filing of a notice of lien^ and of the 'taxpayer's -right- to a hearing concerning the lien.

As noted, petitioner did , not .request 'a hearing, pursuant to section 6320 (a) (3) (B) , regarding the lien notice, and none was held .

Schropp's collection due process (CDP) hearing held before the office of Appeals pursuant to section 6320 (b) and (c) .

We hold that it is not .

OPINION Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323 .

Sullivan a Final Notice--Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing, pursuant to sections 6330(a)(1) and 6331(d)(1), advising him of the IRS's intent to levy upon his property, and also sent to him a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing, pursuant to section 6320(a)(1), advising him that the IRS had filed a notice of tax lien against him .

Discussion Section 6320 provides generally that the Commissioner may not proceed with the collection of taxes by,filing a Federal tax lien until the Commissioner has given the taxpayer notice of the filing and the opportunity for a fair hearing with an impartial Appeals officer.

- If the person makes a timely request for a hearing under section 6320 ( dealing with liens ) or section 6330 (dealing with levies ), a hearing shall be held by the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals . Secs . 6320 (a)(3)(B), (b )( 1), and (c) , 6330 (b)(1) . Administrative, hearings under sections 6320 and 6330 must be conducted in accordance with section 6330 ( c) .

Pursuant to section 6320(b)(2), a taxpayer is entitled to only one hearing regarding the tax period relating to the amount of unpaid tax .

Administrative review is carried out by way of a hearing before the Office of Appeals under section 6330(b) and (c) ; and if the taxpayer is dissatisfied with the outcome there, it can appeal tha t "To the extent practicable, a CDP hearing concerning a lien under section 6320 is to be held in conjunction with a!CDP hearing concerning a levy under section 6330, and the conduct of the lien hearing is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of section 6330 .

Discussion Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish th e person described in section 6321 with written notice (i .e ., the hearing notice) of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323 .

A decision letter is not a determination letter pursuant to section 6320 or 6330 .

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish taxpayers with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323.

Discussion Section 6320 provides generally that the Commissioner may not proceed with the collection of taxes by,filing a Federal tax lien until the Commissioner has given the taxpayer notice of the filing and the opportunity for a fair hearing with an impartial Appeals officer.

Pursuant to section 6320(a)(2)(C), the lien notice must be sent to .

.MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION MARVEL, Judge : Pursuant to section 6320,1 petitioners seek review of respondent's determination that collection action could proceed with respect to petitioners' unpaid 2001 Federal income 'Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, and all Rule references are to the Tax .

We hold that he may .

- 9 - Section 6320 provides that a taxpa Or shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of the filing a notice of Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity fc an administrative hearing .

OPINION Section 6320 provides for Tax Court review of the Commissioner's administrative determinations to proceed with the collection of tax liabilities .

To the extent practicable, a hearing under section 6320 is to be held in conjunction with a hearing under section 6330, and the conduct of the hearing is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of section 6330 .

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a lien under section 6323 .

- 4 - OPINION Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice (i .e ., the hearing notice) of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323 .

Accordingly, we hold that petitioners were afforded their full right to an Appeals hearing under section 6320(a)(3)(B) and (b)(1), and respondent did not abuse his discretion in proceeding with the collection action .

Our jurisdiction in a collection review proceeding brought pursuant to section 6320 or section 6330 generally depends upon the issuance of a valid notice of determination and a timely filed petition .

5 - Section 6320 provides'that the'~Secretaryshall furnish the person` described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a lien under section 63.23 .

Section 6320 requires that the Secretary give the taxpayer written notice of the filing of a tax lien .

OPINION Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish th e person described in section 6321 with written notice (i .e ., the hearing notice) of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323 .

Discussion Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice (i .e ., the hearing notice) of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323 .

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayer with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien and of the taxpayer' s right to a hearing concerning the lien .

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with wri ten notice of the filing of a lien under section 6323 .

Section 6320 provides that a taxpayer shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity for an administrative hearing .

This collection review proceeding was filed pursuant to section 6320, which provides for Tax Court review of respondent’s administrative determinations to proceed with the collection of tax liabilities via liens.

Section 6320 provides that a taxpayer shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity for an administrative hearing .

Section 6320 provides that a taxpayer shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity for an administrative hearing .

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary must send a taxpayer written notice of the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien under section 6323 .

- 5 - Section 6320 provides that a taxpayer shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of,the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity for an administrative hearing .

Section 6320 provides that a taxpayer shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity for an administrative hearing.

We hold that he did not .

For the following reasons, we hold that there was no abuse of discretion in this case.

- 6 - Section 6320 provides that a taxpayer shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of the filing of a Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity for an administrative hearing .

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a Federal tax lien under section 6323.

Discussion Section 6320 provides that a taxpayer shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of the filing of a Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity for an administrative hearing.

We hold that he did to the extent provided herein.

Se.ction 6320 requires that the Secretary notify a person who has failed to pay a tax liability of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323.

However, the jurisdiction of this Court to review determinations by the Commissioner’s Appeals Office pursuant to section 6320 is limited to actions in which the underlying liability is of a type over which the Court normally has jurisdiction.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 (taxpayer) with written notice of the filing of a lien under section 6323 not more than 5 business days after the day of filing the notice.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323.

section 362(a)(8) (2000) in a collection review proceeding brought in this Court pursuant to section 6320.1 As discussed in detail below, we shall grant respondent’s motion to dismiss.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a Federal tax lien under section 6323.

Respondent filed a lien pursuant to sections 6321 and 6323 and issued a notice of lien filing to petitioner pursuant to section 6320.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323.

The decision letter did not purport to be a determination pursuant to section 6320 or 6330.

We hold that they may not.

We hold that they are.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323.

Respondent contends that the Court lacks jurisdiction over the petition on the ground that respondent did not issue a determination letter to petitioner pursuant to section 6320 or 6330.

n each of those cases that (1) because the taxpayer failed to request timely an Appeals Office hearing, (2) the Appeals Office was not required to conduct such a hearing, and (3) the so-called decision letter that the Appeals Office issued “was not, and did not purport to be, a determination letter pursuant to section 6320 or section 6330.” Moorhous v.

In this regard, the decision letter issued to petitioner Dudley Moorhous was not, and did not purport to be, a determination letter pursuant to section 6320 or section 6330.

P nonetheless requested a CDP hearing within 30 days of the IRS’s notice. When the IRS denied P’s request, she petitioned for review of that denial under the color of I.R.C. § 6330(d)(1). Held: We have jurisdiction under I.R.C. § 6330(d)(1) to review a determination only if, in making that determination, the IRS was subject to one

But section 6330(c)(4)(A) prohibits a taxpayer from raising an issue during a CDP hearing where: (1) the issue was raised and considered at a previous section 6320 hearing or in any other previous administrative or judicial proceeding; and (2) the taxpayer participated 6“Where the supervisory approval requirement of section 6751(b)(1) applies, the Appeals officer should obtain verification that such approval was obtained”. ATL & Sons Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner, 152 T.C. 138, 144 (2019). The

xt, the lien notice did not constitute valid notice and demand under section 6303 and section 6321. Respondent's argument assumes that the lien notice issued to Conway on June 1, 2006, can serve as both notice and demand under 6303 and notice under section 6320. This assumption is flawed. A tax lien imposed under section 6321 arises at the time of assessment, see sec. 6322, and is enforceable when a "person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same after demand", sec. 6321 (empha

Section 6320(a)(1) requires the Commissioner to give any person liable to pay tax written notice of the filing of a tax lien upon that taxpayer's property . The .notice must inform the taxpayer of the right to request a hearing in the Commissioner's Appeals Office . Sec . 6320(a) (3) (B) (b) (1) . Section 6330(c), (d), and'(e) governs the conduct of a hearing requested under section 6320 . Sec . 6320(c) . I . Jurisdiction Over Frivolous Return Penalty This Court does not have jurisdiction to rev

An "equivalent hearing" decision letter, unlike a notice of determination, generally does not constitute a "determination" for purposes of section 6320 or 6330 and so does not provide the requisite basis for invoking this Court's jurisdiction under section 6320 or 6330 .

Given this involvement of Appeals in the Examination, Employee Plans and Exempt Organizations, and Collection functions, section 7521 cannot logically be interpreted as properly excluding the Appeals Office simply - 32 - because it is the Appeals Office.1 When Congress enacted sections 6320 and 6330 in 1998, section 7521(a), permitting taxpayers to record any in-person interviews relating to the determination or collection of any tax, was already 10 years old. Admittedly, Congress could have en

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: After conducting a hearing, respondent sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

-3- The parties agree that the Court may dismiss this case pursuant to petitioners’ request.3 We distinguish this dismissal from our jurisprudence that holds that taxpayers may not withdraw a petition under section 6213 to redetermine a deficiency. That jurisprudence stems from the seminal case of Estate of Ming v. Commissioner, 62 T.C. 519 (1974). In Estate of Ming, the taxpayers moved the Court to allow them to withdraw their petition for a redetermination of their 1964, 1965, and 1966 Federal

30, 2001, R mailed to P a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 regarding P’s tax liability for 1995.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COLVIN, Judge: Respondent sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 in which respondent determined that a levy on petitioner’s wages was appropriate to satisfy petitioner's outstanding liabilities for Federal income taxes, additions to - 2 - tax, interest, and fees.

Held, further, this Court lacks jurisdiction. ————— Steven Ray Mather, for petitioners. Tiffany A. Loewenstein, Gabriel H. Kim, and Michael K. Park, for respondent. Served 10/22/24 2 OPINION FOLEY, Judge: The sole issue for decision is whether Foreign Bank Account Reporting (FBAR) penalties are subject to the requirements of secti

n Appeals Office hearing so that they could continue negotiations over an installment agreement. Those negotiations faltered. Later, R filed a notice ofFederal tax lien against Ps' property. Ps requested a collection due process (CDP) hearing under I.R.C. sec. 6320. They requested that R consider the previously rejected offer- in-compromise. Ps also requested an installment agreement and requested reliefdue to economic hardship. Ps did not submit financial information beyond what they had provid

In Wagner, we found our holding in Estate ofMing to be inapplicable and held that the taxpayers could dismiss (i.e., withdraw) their petition filed pursuant to sections 6320(c) and 6330(d) for review ofa notice ofdetermination approving a notice ofFederal tax lien placed on their property. In so holding we observed: Section 7459(d) applies specifically to a petition that is filed for a redetermination ofa deficiency and makes no mention ofa petition that is filed under section 6320(c) to review

When a hearing officer is unable or refuses to consider collection alternatives because ofa taxpayer's failure to provide financial information, we have held thatthere was no abuse ofdiscretion. Schwersenskyv. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-178; see also Lance v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-129. Ifa taxpayer fails to pay any Federal income tax liability after notice and demand, a lien in favor ofthe United States is imposed on all the property ofthe delinquenttaxpayer. Sec. 6321. Section 6320(a

On February 1, 2011, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy action.

or 2006 was assessed on September 1, 2008. - 3 - The outstanding tax liabilities for 2004 and 2006 remained unpaid and, on August 27, 2009, the IRS sent petitioners a notice of Federal tax lien filing informing·them of heir right to a hearing under section 6320. In the notice, the IRS informed petitioners that a Notice of Federal Tax Lien was being filed that same day. Petitioners responded to the Federal tax lien filing by submitting a completed Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process

Because none of these requirements was met by the October 9, 2007, deadline, the settlement officer I recommended and the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals (Appeals) held that petitioners did not qualify for collection alternatives. Notices of determination concerning colleátion action for the filed lien and the proposed levy were sent to Mr. Orian on October 23 and 24, 2007, respectively.- OPINION I., Mr. Orian's Underlying Liability Section 6320(a) and (b) provides that a taxpayer sha

A trial was held on February 25, 2009, in Tampa, Florida . Discussion I . Petitioners' Underlying Liabilities Sections 6320 (pertaining to liens) and 6330 (pertaining to levies) were enacted as part of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, . Pub . L . .105-206, sec . 3401, 112 Stat . 746, in order to afford taxpayers new procedural protections with regard to collection matters . Section 6320(a) and (b) generally provide that the. Secretary cannot proceed with collect

Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent GLOBAL HORIZONS, INC., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket Nos. 26466-07L, 10791-08L. Filed October 25, 2010. Ps filed petitions for judicial review pursuant to sec. 6320 and/or 6330, I.R.C., in response to determinations by R that lien and levy action was appropriate. Held: R's filing of the lien and levy to protect the Government's interest does not constitute an abuse of discretion. R's determination to p

--- MAJORITY --- OPINION Gerber, Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) issued to petitioner Mattie Marie Mason.

s regardless of whether it has been filed by the Secretary . Sec. 6321 . Accordingly, the regulations provide : A NFTL becomes effective upon filing . The validity and priority of a NFTL is not conditioned on notification to the taxpayer pursuant to section 6320 . Therefore, the failure to notify the taxpayer concerning the filing of a NFTL does not affect the validity or priority of the NFTL . When the IRS determines that it failed properly to provide a taxpayer with a CDP Notice, it will promp

On June 4, 2002, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION CHIECHI, Judge: Petitioners filed the respective petitions in these consolidated cases in response to notices of determina- tion concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) issued to James E.

On January 12, 2005, respondent mailed to petitioner a notice advising petitioner that respondent had filed a Notice of Federal Tax Lien for the subject years and that petitioner had as to this filing a right under section 6320 to a hearing with Appeals .

On may 20, 2005, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the notice of intent to levy and the filing of the NFTL .

14984-05L arises from a petition filed in response to a Determination Letter Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) issued on August 2, 2005.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION CHIECHI, Judge: Petitioners filed the respective petitions in these consolidated cases in response to notices of determina- tion concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) issued to James E .

- 4 - On June 28, 2005, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his 2001 tax year .

MEMORANDUM OPINION NIMS, Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

MEMORANDUM OPINION NIMS, Judge : This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION WELLS, Judge: Petitioner seeks review, pursuant to section 6320,1 of respondent’s determination to proceed with the collection of petitioner’s income tax liabilities for the 1990, 1Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

SERVED JUN 21 2007 - 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION NIMS, Judge : Petitioner asks this Court to review a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

14984-05L arises from a petition filed in response to a Determination Letter Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) issued on August 2, 2005 .

Petitioner filed a petition in response to respondent’s Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing under Section 6320 and/or - 2 - 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code (Decision Letter).1 The issue for decision is whether the Court lacks jurisdiction under sections 6320 and 6330 with regard to the years in issue.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323 . The notice required by section 6320 is to be provided not more than 5 business days after the day of the filing of the notice of lien . Sec . 6320(a)(2) . Section 6320 further provide

MEMORANDUM OPINION GOEKE, Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .' At issue is (1) whether respondent abused hi s 'Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued .

before the Court on respondent’s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction - 2 - and petitioner’s motion for partial summary judgment.1 Petitioners filed a petition in response to respondent’s Decision Letters Concerning Equivalent Hearing under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code (Decision Letters).2 The issue for decision is whether the Court lacks jurisdiction under sections 6320 and 6330 with regard to the years in issue.

MEMORANDUM OPINION CHIECHI, Judge : Petitioner filed the petition in this case in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320' and/or 6330 (notice of determina- tion) .

SERVED NOV 2 7 2006 - 2 - Background On January 5, 2006, respondent issued to petitioner a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code (decision letter) regarding proposed collection action for petitioner's tax years 1995, 1996, and 1997 .' In the decision letter, respondent's Office of Appeals informed petitioner that her due process hearing request was not filed within the time prescribed under section 6320 and/or 6330 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION GOEKE, Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice o f determination) .' At issue is (1) whether respondent abused hi s 'Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued .

before the Court on respondent’s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction - 2 - and petitioner’s motion for partial summary judgment.1 Petitioners filed a petition in response to respondent’s Decision Letters Concerning Equivalent Hearing under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code (Decision Letters).2 The issue for decision is whether the Court lacks jurisdiction under sections 6320 and 6330 with regard to the years in issue.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION GOEKE, Judge: These consolidated cases concern: (1) A notice of determination concerning collection action (notice of determination) upholding liens under section 6320 for petitioners’ taxable years 1997 through 1999; (2) a notice of determination upholding a levy under section 6330 for petitioners’ taxable year 1999; (3) a notice of determination - 2 - upholding a lien for petitioners’ taxable year 2000.

Because the making of the second offer was so long after the first and the second offer preceded the filing of the lien, we need to consider only whether respondent abused his discretion in rejecting the second offer.7 Section 6320 provides that a taxpayer shall be notified in writing by the Secretary of the filing of a Federal tax lien and provided with an opportunity for an administrative hearing.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COLVIN, Judge: Respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 (the lien determination) in which respondent determined that the notice of Federal tax lien regarding petitioner’s income tax liabilities for 1994-99 was appropriate and would not be withdrawn.

Determination To Proceed With Collection Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice (i.e., the hearing notice) of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION GOEKE, Judge: These consolidated cases concern: (1) A notice of determination concerning collection action (notice of determination) upholding liens under section 6320 for petitioners’ taxable years 1997 through 1999; (2) a notice of determination upholding a levy under section 6330 for petitioners’ taxable year 1999; (3) a notice of determination - 2 - upholding a lien for petitioners’ taxable year 2000.

On February 14, 2003, the Appeals Office issued to peti- tioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On November 30, 2001, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his 1995 tax year (notice of determination).

On August 26, 2004, respondent sent petitioner: (1) A decision letter concerning equivalent hearing under section 6320 and/or 6330 stating that the notice of intent to levy for income taxes for 2001 would not be withdrawn; (2) a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 stating that the notice of intent to levy for income taxes for 1999 and 2000 would not be withdrawn; (3) a notice of determination concernin

MEMORANDUM OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: Respondent sent petitioner a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 63301 for 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997.

tioners’ 1998 return and 1999 return, the notice of tax lien, petitioners’ Form 12153, petitioners’ attachment to Form 12153, and respondent’s Form 4340, Certification of Assessment and Payments, for each of their taxable years 1998 and 1999, the Appeals Office issued to peti- tioners a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

O February 18, 2005, respondent's Appeals Office mailed to petiti ner a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection 0 Action s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the filing of the notice of Federal tax lien against petitioner .

On November 5, 2001, the Appeals officer issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, wherein he determined: (1) That the requirements of all laws and administrative procedures had been met; (2) that petitioners had had a prior opportunity to dispute the underlying tax liability and were thus precluded from contesting it in the collection proceeding; and (3) that no other issues had been raised.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION CHIECHI, Judge: Petitioners filed the petition in this case in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

That same day, respondent sent petitioner a notice pursuant to section 6320 advising him of the filing of the 3 We use the term "nominee" throughout the opinion for convenience only.

On May 30, 2002, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 tax years (notice of determination).

Ultimately, on February 5, 2002, the hearing granted under section 6320 (a section 6320 hearing) was held.

On July 7, 2003, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his 1996 and 1998 tax years (notice of determination).

On November 2, 2001, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 (Lien) of the Internal Revenue Code was sent to petitioner.

nal Notice--Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing, was sent to petitioner on April 2, 2002. On April 9, 2002, respondent sent petitioner a letter entitled, “Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing under I.R.C. §6320”. Petitioner’s designated representative timely requested an administrative hearing under sections 6320 and 6330. Petitioner’s sole contention in the administrative hearing request was that “there are egregious errors that once corrected

MEMORANDUM OPINION GERBER, Judge: Respondent in a motion filed on August 12, 2003, moves for summary judgment on the question of whether collection may proceed in accord with the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner February 20, 2003.

On April 2, 2002, Appeals Officer Reagan sent petitioner a letter in which a face-to-face hearing, as authorized by section 6320, was scheduled.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COLVIN, Judge: On May 23, 2002, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, in which respondent determined that the - 2 - filing of a tax lien relating to petitioner’s 1998 tax liability was appropriate.1 The sole issue for decision is whether respondent’s determination that the filing of a tax lien relating to petitioner’s 1998 tax liability was appropriate was an abuse of discretion

ax returns for 1995, 1996, and 1997. Each of these returns showed tax due, but petitioners did not submit payment with the returns. On March 1, 2002, respondent issued petitioners a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under I.R.C. Section 6320, listing their total 1995, 1996, and 1997 liabilities as $7,832.90. On March 4, 2002, respondent filed a notice of Federal tax lien in El Paso County, Texas. 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION GOEKE, Judge: This case arises from respondent’s issuance of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for petitioner’s taxable year 1998.

On that same date respondent sent Mark Fowler and Joylyn Souter- Fowler (petitioners) a second Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 3 - action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330,2 which upheld respondent’s NFTL.3 The issues for decision presented by petitioner’s timely filed petition with this Court are: 1.

- 4 - On April 11, 2002, respondent sent petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the determination letter), in which respondent denied petitioners’ request for relief.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On August 9, 2001, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to his tax liabilities for 1997 and 1998.

On March 18, 2002, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioner regarding his 1996, 1997, and 1998 tax years.

On December 12, 2001, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination letter).

On July 25, 2001, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, and 1994 tax years (notice of determination).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COLVIN, Judge: On August 11, 2000, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the lien or levy determination), in which respondent determined to proceed with collection of deficiencies in petitioner’s income tax, additions - 2 - to tax, and interest for 1988-89.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On May 7, 2002, respondent’s Appeals Office mailed to petitioner, at his Las Vegas address, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to his tax liability for 1998.

MEMORANDUM OPINION CHIECHI, Judge: Petitioner filed the petition in this case in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determina- tion).

On April 23, 2002, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1994.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COLVIN, Judge: Respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the lien or levy determination) on May 18, 2001, in which respondent determined to proceed with collection of - 2 - deficiencies in petitioner’s income tax, additions to tax, and interest for 1996.

On March 22, 2002, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding her 1996, 1997, and 1998 tax years (notice of determination).

On June 8, 2000, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1987, 1988, 1989, and 1992 concluding that respondent could proceed with the proposed collection action because “the proposed collection action balances the need for efficient collection of taxes with * * * [petitioner’s] legitimate concern that any collection action be no more intrusive than n

On January 30, 2002, petitioner timely submitted Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing, requesting a hearing under section 6320 (the hearing).

Respondent’s Notices of Determination On April 2, 2001, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to petitioner separate Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to his tax liabilities for 1993 through 1997.

Section 6320 provides that the Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section 6323. The notice required by section 6320 must be provided not more than 5 business days after the day of the filing of the notice of lien. Sec. 6320(a)(2). Section 6320 further provides tha

On January 3, 2002, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1993, 1995, and 1996.

On May 26, 1999, the Internal Revenue Service Appeals Office in Greensboro, North Carolina, issued two separate Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 - 2 - and/or 6330 (notice[s] of determination).

That document stated in pertinent part: • All provisions of IRC § 6330 and IRC § 6320 have been met.

respect to, inter alia, his taxable years 1987 and 1990. That notice stated in pertinent part as follows: Summary of Determination: The Notice of Federal Tax Liens were filed on 8/18/94 and are not subject to the Due Process Proce- dures under IRC Section 6320. With respect to the Notice of Intent to Levy, there has been no response to requests for the comple- tion of financial statements in order to determine if a possible collection alternative is feasible. We are sustaining the District’s de

Muldavin a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1987 and petitioners a notice of determination for 1988, 1989, and 1991.

On February 16, 2001, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 stating that respondent’s determination (that the filing of the Notice of Federal Tax Lien for liabilities owing for the taxable year 1995 is appropriate) should be sustained.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On January 3, 2002, respondent sent petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

ck Of Jurisdiction And To Strike, as supplemented. Respondent moves that this case, insofar as it relates to a decision letter concerning equivalent hearing, be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that “no Notice of Determination under I.R.C. § 6320 or § 6330 was - 2 - sent to petitioners with respect to a proposed levy to collect liabilities arising with respect to tax year 1997.” As explained in detail below, we shall grant respondent’s motion, as supplemented. Background The reco

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On July 2, 2001, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On July 2, 2001, respondent sent petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On October 31, 2001, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

th respect to petitioner's taxable year 1989. On or before April 29, 1999, in response to the notice of intent to levy, petitioner filed Form 12153, Request for a 3The Federal tax lien filed on Sept. 28, 1993, was not a collection action subject to sec. 6320. See sec. 301.6320- 1(a)(1), (b)(2) Q&A-B2, Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also Nicklaus v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 117, 118 n.3 (2001). 4The levy made on Jan. 10, 1997, was nót subject to sec. 6330. See sec. 301.6330-1(a)(1), (3) Q&A-A4, (4) Ex

nt Docket Nos. 2021-00L, 2658-00L. Filed July 20, 2001. Joyce Griggs, for petitioners. Ross M. Greenberg, for respondent. MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION FOLEY, Judge: The issue in this case is whether respondent has met the requirements of section 6320. All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as amended. -2- FINDINGS OF FACT When the petitions were filed, the Ledfords operated Service Engineering Trust, an entity located in Colorado Springs, Colorado, where they resided.

- 2 - Held: P received an adequate opportunity for an Appeals hearing pursuant to sec. 6320(b), I.R.C. In any event, the communications between the Appeals officer and P constituted an Appeals hearing under sec. 6320(b), I.R.C. Held, further, P’s challenge to the merits of R’s assessment of the tax deficiency and additions to tax fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Held, further, because the Court has jurisdiction under sec. 6404(i), I.R.C., over interest abatement cases, the

Generally, a “seriously delinquent tax debt” is an unpaid, legally enforceable federal tax liability of an individual that (1) has been assessed; (2) is greater than $50,000; and (3) with respect to which a notice of lien has been filed pursuant to section 6323 and the administrative rights under section 6320 with respect to such filing have been exhausted or have lapsed, or a levy is made pursuant to section 6331.

7 A parallel regulation under section 6320 includes the same rule.

Zulfiqar a Notice of Determination Concerning IRS Collection Actions under Internal Revenue Code Section 6320 or 6330 (Notice of Determination), sustaining the levy notice.

Although the term “underlying tax liability” is not defined in section 6320 or 6330, we have said it is reasonable to interpret the term as a reference to the amounts that the Commissioner assessed 5 SO DiPietro did not consider petitioners’ request for abatement of interest, since she determined petitioners failed to properly establish their claim or otherwise specify grounds for their request.

In 2017, petitioner and his spouse filed petitions with the Court challenging Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 issued by the IRS in connection with their federal income tax liability for their 2008 tax year.

4 [*4] may petition this Court to review a notice of determination concerning a collection action under section 6320 or 6330 within 30 days of such a determination.

It generally means an unpaid, legally enforceable Federal tax liability of an individual— (A) which has been assessed, (B) which is greater than $50,000, and (C) with respect to which— (i) a notice of lien has been filed pursuant to section 6323 and the administrative rights under section 6320 with respect to such filing have been exhausted or have lapsed, or (ii) a levy is made pursuant to section 6331.

In the normal course, under section 6330(d)(1), a taxpayer may petition this Court to review a notice of determination concerning a collection action under section 6320 or 6330 within 30 days of such a determination.

§ 7345(b)(1).5 In addition, to prevail on his motion for summary judgment, the Commissioner must demonstrate that either “(i) a notice of lien has been filed pursuant to section 6323 and the administrative rights under section 6320 with respect to such filing have been exhausted or have lapsed, or (ii) a levy is made pursuant to section 6331.” I.R.C.

the return. On November 9, 2020, the IRS assessed the tax shown as due and took action to collect the unpaid tax. On May 27, 2021, the IRS filed a Notice of Federal Tax Lien (NFTL) for 2019 and notified petitioners of their right to a hearing under section 6320. The NFTL reflected an un- paid 2019 tax liability of $91,497 at that time.2 2 The NFTL also reflected a small tax liability for 2018, which was fully dis- charged by payments in October 2023 and March 2024. Petitioners did not dispute t

But what if the issue of relief comes up in a CDP case filed under section 6320 or 6330?

On September 1, 2020, the IRS issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of Determination) to Ms.

463, 467–68 (2011) (holding similarly for CDP hearings under section 6320), supplementing 131 T.C.

Under section 6330(d)(1), a person may petition this Court to re- view a notice of determination concerning collection action under section 6320 or 6330.

After a hearing, R issued a notice of determination to P that in relevant part sustained the collection actions related to the I.R.C. § 6038(b)(1) penalties. P filed his petition with this Court. Relying on Farhy v. Commissioner, 160 T.C. 399, 403–13 (2023), we granted summary judgment in P’s favor that R lacked authority to assess

jecting collection alternatives, and whether the penalties violated the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Held: The settlement officer did not violate P’s Fifth Amendment due process rights or his rights under I.R.C. § 6320 or 6330. Held, further, the settlement officer did not abuse his discretion in rejecting P’s collection alternatives that were significantly below his reasonable collection potential. Held, further, R lacked authority to assess the penal

Discussion Under section 6330(d)(1), a person may petition this Court to re- view a notice of determination concerning collection action under section 6320 or 6330.

Section 6320 merely requires the IRS to send notice to the taxpayer that it has filed an NFTL and inform the taxpayer of his right to seek a CDP hearing. See § 6320(a)(1), (2), (3)(B). “Minor defects may be over- looked where the taxpayer knows of and pursues the right to adminis- trative and judicial review.” Miccosukee Tribe of Indians, 110 T.C.M

As required by section 6320, the Commissioner notified Mr.

§ 7345(b)(1), (f).3 In addition, to prevail on his motion for summary judgment, the Commissioner must demonstrate that either “(i) a notice of lien has been filed pursuant to section 6323 and the administrative rights under section 6320 with respect to such filing have been exhausted or have lapsed, or (ii) a levy is made pursuant to section 6331.” I.R.C.

In a section 6320 CDP hearing a taxpayer may raise any relevant issue and request the consideration of a collection alternative. See §§ 6320(c), 6330(c)(2)(A). An issue is not properly raised at the CDP hearing if the taxpayer fails to request consideration of that issue by the SO or if the taxpayer requests consideration but fails to present any eviden

2 Section 7345(b)(1) generally defines a “seriously delinquent tax debt” as an unpaid, legally enforceable Federal tax liability of an individual— (A) which has been assessed, (B) which is greater than $50,000, and (C) with respect to which— (i) a notice of lien has been filed pursuant to section 6323 and the administrative rights under section 6320 with respect to such filing have been exhausted or have lapsed, or (ii) a levy is made pursuant to section 6331.

pondence was unclaimed and returned to respondent. On April 17, 2017, respondent assessed the deficiency and the penalty. On February 13, 2018, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Federal Tax Lien (NFTL) Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320. On March 2, 2018, petitioner filed a request for a collection due process (CDP) hearing. At the CDP hearing, petitioner argued that she had not received the deficiency notice and was not liable for the deficiency, interest, or penalty.

(As the careful reader will note, for reasons the record does not reveal, the IRS did not file notices of federal tax lien for 2010, 2014, and 2015.) As required by section 6320, the IRS also issued to the Beltons notices of federal tax lien filings informing them of their right to collection due process hearings.

The account transcripts 6 [*6] also show that petitioner’s administrative rights under section 6320 have been exhausted or have lapsed.

A “seriously delinquent tax debt,” by definition, does not include a tax liability for which an NFTL has been filed if administrative rights under section 6320 with respect to that filing have not yet been exhausted or lapsed.

The provisions of section 6330(c), (d), and (e) also govern the conduct of a CDP hearing requested under section 6320, and CDP hearings held under sections 6320 and 6330 may be heard together.

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judge: This case is before the Court on a Petition for review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated February 13, 2018 (notice of determination).1 The notice of determination sustained a notice of federal tax lien (NFTL) filing (NFTL filing) with respect to trust fund recovery penalties (TFRPs) under section 6672.

Cosio’s case and by letter dated October 12, 2017, issued to him a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code (notice of determination), sustaining the proposed levy action with respect to tax year 2015.5 In the notice of 5 By letter dated October 12, 2017, Ms.

See §§ 6320(C), 6330(d)(1); Rule 330(b); Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492, 498 (2000). 7 [*7] Discussion A. Summary Judgment Standard The purpose of summary judgment is to expedite litigation and avoid costly, time-consuming, and unnecessary trials. Fla. Peach Corp. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988). The Court may grant sum- mary judgment w

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The Petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) dated April 15, 2019, upholding a proposed levy collection action for tax periods ending June 30, September 30, and December 31, 2012; March 31, June 30, September 30, and December 31, 2013; and March 31, 2014.1 We must consider whether respondent’s determination to proceed wi

That provision precludes taxpayers from raising issues at a collection hearing if “(i) the issue was raised and considered at a previous hearing under section 6320 or in any other previous administrative or judicial proceeding; and (ii) the person seeking to raise the issue participated meaningfully in such hearing or proceeding.” § 6330(c)(4)(A).

panded jurisdiction in CDP and stand-alone innocent-spouse cases. RRA 1998 created CDP procedures to enable taxpayers to challenge how the Commissioner collected taxes that he assessed. See RRA 1998 § 3401, 112 Stat. at 746 (codified as amended at §§ 6320, 6330). This new CDP right made for a major change in the way the IRS used two of its most important collection tools—liens and levies. Once a taxpayer’s liability has been assessed, the amount of the liability becomes a lien in favor of the go

Rowen a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the NFTL filings and the proposed levies relating to tax years 2003 through 2007.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) upholding proposed collection actions regarding petitioner’s unpaid income tax liability for 2013 and section 6702 penalties for 2010 and 2011.

Collection action will be subject to the Collection Due Process rights afforded a taxpayer under §§ 6320 and 6330; however you are precluded from contesting the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability upon which the restitution is based.

Heller provided and discussed the issue with him again on August 13 and August 20; but Appeals thereafter issued a “Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code” on September 11, 2015, sustaining the levy action and concluding that she could not consider petitioners’ interest abatement request.

Numerous administrative proceedings followed, culminating in a Supplemental Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

This collection due process (CDP) case was commenced in response to two Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 - 3 - [*3] and/or 6330 dated August 11, 2017, upholding two Federal tax lien filings regarding petitioner’s unpaid tax liabilities for 2007 and 2014.

ory question and answer appearing in section 301.6330-1(i)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs., which sets forth a 12(...continued) different from the period for submitting a written request for an equivalent hearing with respect to a CDP Notice issued under section 6320. For a CDP Notice issued under section 6320, a taxpayer must submit a written request for an equivalent hearing within the one-year period commencing the day after the end of the five-business-day period following the filing of the NFTL

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 dated June 1, 2018, sustaining a notice of intent to levy for petitioner’s Served 10/19/21 - 2 - [*2] 1998 and 2000 tax years (notice of determination).1 Petitioner, Ronald Goldberg, was a partner in two oil and gas partnerships.

Taxpayers who challenge their underlying tax liability in cases arising under section 6320 or 6330 bear the burden of proof regarding their correct tax liability.

MEMORANDUM OPINION PUGH, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining a notice of Federal tax lien (NFTL) filing by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to secure petitioner’s unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for 2004 through 2012.

On November 16, 2017, SO Simpson issued two Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code.

ers could not pay $50,000 per month as shown by the RO's estimate that petitioners could pay only $3,438 per month, and (3) petitioners had "significant equity in assets that must first be liquidated." She also stated that no collection alternative was available to petitioners and that a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (notice ofdetermination) was going to be issued.

filed Forms 6118 - 46 - [*46] seeking refunds ofthe tax paid," and that he "directs * * * [respondent] to suspend all collection activities when * * * [his] claim for a refund in a section 6700 case is pending." While petitioner's CDP levy hearing was pending, respondent issued a Notice ofFederal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320 (lien notice) dated December 9, 2014, to petitioner for the tax years at issue.

Notice ofdetermination More than four months after the CDP conference, on May 28, 2013, the Office ofAppeals issued Goldberg a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On February 16, 2018, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Code with respect to the years in issue, sustaining the proposed levy action.

6320, 6330.¹ Respondent filed a motion to dismiss for lack ¹All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for all (continued...) SERVED Jan 29 2020 - 2 - [*2] ofjurisdiction upon the ground that no notice ofdetermination under either section 6320 or 6330 was sent to petitioner for the taxable years 1999 through 2010 or 2014.

For purposes - 9 - [*9] ofsection 6320, subsections (c), (d), (e), and (g) ofsection 6330 generally apply.

On November 28, 2017, respondent issued by letter to petitioner a notice of NFTL filing for each TFRP assessed for the periods at issue, for a total unpaid balance of$51,849.4 Each notice ofNFTL filing informed him ofhis right to a CDP hearing under section 6320. Petitioner timely requested a CDP hearing for the periods at issue on Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process or Equivalent Hearing. When prompted to "[c]heck the most appropriate box for the reason you disagree with the filing

In a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetennination), respondent sustained a notice ofintent to levy (notice oflevy) issued with respect to what respondent contends is petitioner's unpaid tax liability for 2014.

Barnhill a "Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code", in which Appeals sustained the NFTL filing.

Mather) a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under - 10 - [*10] Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code to that effect (notice ofdetermination).

Section 6330(d)(1) allows a taxpayerto "appeal * * * to the Tax Court" a determination under section 6320 or 6330.

oner. Corey R. Clapper and Amy Dyar Seals, for respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Office ofAppeals (Appeals) notice ofdetermination concerning collection action under section 6320. The notice sustained a Letter 3172, Notice ofFederal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC 6320 (NFTL), for balances ofrestitution-based assessments (RBA) pursuant to SERVED May 28 2020 - 2 - [*2] section 6201(a)(4) for

Subsequently, SO Stockli closed petitioner's case and, on October 12, 2017, issued to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination), sustaining the proposed collection action with respect to 2015.

On April 17, 2015, the Appeals Office issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner sustaining the lien filing.

The collection-review hearing after a lien-notice filing is similar to the collection-review hearing held before the imposition ofa levy, except that the reference in section 6330(c)(2)(A) to the proposed levy is read as a reference to the lien. Sec. 6320(c); see Thompson v. Commissioner, 140 T.C. 173, 178 (2013). After the Office ofAppe

MEMORANDUM OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to two Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices ofdetermination) dated July 19, 2018, that were issued to each petitioner by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or respondent) Office of Appeals.

Section 6320(a) provides that the Secretary5 shall furnish the taxpayer an NFTL within five business days after the notice oflien is filed.

On May 6, 2014, after the Appeals officer assigned to petitioner's CDP hearing request conducted a CDP hearing with petitioner's authorized representative in which he was allowed to raise petitioner's underlying tax liability, Appeals sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the NFTL with respect to petitioner's outstanding 2010 income tax liability (notice ofdetermination).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This collection due process (CDP) case commenced in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetenmination) upholding a proposed levy collection action and a notice ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) regarding petitioner's SERVED Feb 04 2019 - 2 - [*2] unpaid tax liability for tax year 2001.

Appeals sent petitioner two notices ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330, one each for the NFTL filing and the FNIL, dated February 3, 2017.

Section 6330(c)(4)(A) prohibits a taxpayer from raising an issue during the CDP hearing if(1) the issue was raised and considered at a previous section 6320 hearing or in any other previous administrative orjudicial proceeding and (2) the taxpayerparticipated meaningfully in such a hearing or proceeding.

itioner's supplemental CDP hearing. We disagree. A CDP hearing may be provided by an Appeals officer or employee within the Appeals Office who has had no prior involvement with respect to the unpaid tax before the first hearing under section 6330 or section 6320. Sec. 6330(b)(1), (3); see Offiler - 14 - [*14] v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492, 496 (2000). Prior involvement exists only when (1) the taxpayer, the tax, and the tax period at issue in the CDP hearing also were at issue in a prior non-CDP

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This collection due process (CDP) case was commenced in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated February 27, 2018, sustaining the filing ofa Federal tax lien in relation to petitioner's unpaid tax liabilities for 2013 and 2015 (years at issue).

On August 12, 2013, Appeals sent to petitioners notices ofdetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices of determination) with respect to the income tax liabilities.

The settlement officer determined that the proposed levy should be sustained, and on August 26, 2014, Appeals sent petitioner (with a copy to its authorized representative) a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to that effect (notice ofdetermination).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This collection due process (CDP) case was commenced in response to two Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 dated August 11, 2017, upholding two notice ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) filings regarding petitioner's unpaid tax SERVED Sep 16 2019 - 2 - [*2] liabilities for 2007 and 2014 (years in issue).

Section 6330(d)(1) allows a taxpayerto "appeal * * * to the Tax Court" a determination under section 6320 or 6330.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PUGH, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (notice ofdetermination), sustaining the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) filing ofa notice offederal tax lien (NFTL) to secure SERVED Dec 16 2019 - 2 - [*2] petitioner's unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for 2006, 2007, and 2008 and frivolous return penalties under section 6702(a) for

4On July 14, 2011, the IRS issued to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, upholding the notice ofFederal tax lien filing for taxable years 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

4On July 14, 2011, the IRS issued to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, upholding the notice ofFederal tax lien filing for taxable years 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PARIS, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review ofa Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated December 27, 2013 (notice ofdetermination).¹ The notice of ¹Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal (continued...) SERVED Jun 27 2019 - 2 - [*2] determination sustained two notices ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) filings with respect to trust fund recovery penalties (T

- 11 - [*11] On July 13, 2017, a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 and Your Request for Relieffrom Joint and Several Liability under Section 6015 was sent to petitioner.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PUGH, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination), sustaining respondent's Notice ofIntent to Levy to SERVED Apr 10 2018 - 2 - [*2] collect petitioner's unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 (subject years).¹ FINDINGS OF FACT The stipulated facts are incorporated in our findings by this reference.

On November 10, 2016, the SO issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy and the NFTL.

On August 8, 2018, respondent issued a Supplemental Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the filing ofthe NFTL.

MEMORANDUM OPINION LEYDEN, Special Trial Judge: The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Office ofAppeals (Appeals Office) issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of SERVED Jul 12 2018 - 2 - [*2] determination) dated May 10, 2016.¹ The notice ofdetermination sustained a proposed levy with respect to petitioner's unpaid income tax liability for 2014.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS)2 Office ofAppeals (Appeals Office) issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated August 5, 2016.

The regulations specifically provide, in the case ofa section 6320 challenge to an NFTL filing: "Ifthe taxpayerpreviously received a CDP Notice under section 6330 with respect to the same tax and tax period and did not request a CDP hearing with respect to that earlier CDP Notice, the taxpayerhad a prior opportunity to dispute the existence or amount ofthe underlying tax liability." Sec.

On October 19, 2016, the IRS issued a Letter 3193, Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy.

Section 6330(d)(1) allows a taxpayerto petition this Court for review ofa determination made under section 6320 or 6330 and grants usjurisdiction with respect to the matter upon the timely filing ofa petition.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PUGH, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330,¹ ¹ Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and in effect at all relevant times.

Section 6330(d)(1) allows a taxpayerto petition this Court for a review ofa - 9 - [*9] determination made under section 6320 or 6330 and grants usjurisdiction with respect to the matter upon the timely filing ofa petition.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This collection due process (CDP) case was commenced in response to three Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices ofdetermination) upholding proposed levy collection actions regarding petitioners' unpaid tax liabilities for tax SERVED Nov 05 2018 - 2 - [*2] years 2013 and 2014 (years at issue).

On June 28, 2017, the SO sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action.

Introduction Sections 6320 and 6330 provide taxpayers the opportunity for notice and a hearing upon the filing ofan NFTL (section 6320) and before a levy to collect unpaid tax (section 6330).

Petitioner did not call the SO for the scheduled supplemental CDP hearing.5 On February 6, 2017, the SO sent petitioner a Supplemental Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action.

Generally, we have held that it is not an abuse ofdiscretion for purposes ofsection 6320 or 6330 when an Appeals Office employee relies on guidelines published in the IRM to evaluate a proposed installment agreement.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated October 6, 2015, that was issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or respondent) Office ofAppeals.

On December 16, 2015, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PUGH, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination), sustaining respondent's Notice ofFederal Tax Lien SERVED Sep 10 2018 - 2 - [*2] (NFTL) to collect petitioner's unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 (years at issue).¹ The issues for decision are: (1) whether petitioner should be permitted to challenge his incom

Introduction Sections 6320 and 6330 provide taxpayers the opportunity for notice and a hearing upon the filing ofan NFTL (section 6320) and before a levy to collect unpaid tax (section 6330).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice ofDetermination Conceming Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated December 1, 2014.

Because petitioner failed to submit the tax return for 2012 as requested by SO Chavez, the Appeals Office issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the levy action.

Prior involvement is - 12 - [*12] defined as "participation or involvement in a matter (other than a CDP hearing held under either section 6320 or section 6330) that the taxpayermay have had with respect to the tax and tax period shown on the CDP Notice." Sec.

Notice ofDetermination On July 15, 2015, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the FNIL.

Sullivan asserted that this return was destroyed with the other records for 2006.4 SO Smith sent petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated July 27, 2015.

On April 7, 2014, the IRS issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the lien at issue.

- 7 - [*7] On July 15, 2015, Appeals sent to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (notice).2 The notice recited SO Harding's determination to sustain the filing ofthe NFTL and the issuance ofthe levy notice.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PARIS, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review ofa Notice ofDetermination Conceming Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination),¹ dated July 9, 2014, sustaining a proposed ¹Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal (continued...) SERVED Feb 21 2017 - 2 - [*2] collection by levy ofpetitioner's unpaid 2010 Federal income tax liability.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PUGH, Judge: Petitioner, while residing in California, timely petitioned the Court for review ofrespondent's two Notices ofDetermination Conceming Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330,¹ sustaining the Notice of ¹ Unless otherwise indicated all section references are the Internal Revenue (continued...) SERVED Aug 08 2017 - 2 - [*2] Intent to Levy and the filing ofa Notice ofFederal Tax Lien with respect to petitioner's outstanding Federal inc

MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).¹ Respondent moves that this case be dismissed on the ground that the petition was not filed within the time prescribed by section 6330(d) or section 7502.

- 7 - [*7] On December 10, 2015, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, for the years in question, and petitioner timely petitioned this Court alleging: (1) respondent erroneously determined that he was not eligible to have his accounts placed in CNC status; (2) respondent did not provide petitioner with sufficient time to submit documentation to the IRS Office ofAppeals; and (3) respondent wr

- 13 - The term "underlying tax liability" is not "defined in section 6320 or 6330, nor is there any specific reference to that term in the legislative history." Mont- gomery v.

- 13 - The term "underlying tax liability" is not "defined in section 6320 or 6330, nor is there any specific reference to that term in the legislative history." Mont- gomery v.

to increase tax liabilities. Some taxpayers receiving those notices will petition the Court. Their ticket to the Tax Court will also be a ticket to the gallows. Other taxpayers will not file petitions and may ultimately seek relief(i.e., pursuant to sec. 6320 or 6330) when the IRS attempts to collect. Ifwe invalidate $0 deficiency notices, taxpayers would typically prevail in collection proceedings. Instead, our determination ofwhether the taxpayers were misled will now determine their fate. - 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION JACOBS, Judge: These consolidated cases were commenced in response to Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 ¹Cases ofthe following petitioners are consolidated herewith: Salvador Santana, Sr., docket Nos.

MEMORANDUM OPINION JACOBS, Judge: These consolidated cases were commenced in response to Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 ¹Cases ofthe following petitioners are consolidated herewith: Salvador Santana, Sr., docket Nos.

Accordingly, on April 28, 2016, the SO sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning - 5 - Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action.

- 16 - [*16] On October 24, 2014, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) in which that office sustained the notice ofintent to levy.

Regarding the unfiled returns and lack ofestimated payments, petitioner stated: "Regarding your information request, my 2015 tax return is on extension, and I am searching my records for the other documents you requested." On May 23, 2016, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for petitioner's tax years 2010 and 2013, sustaining the proposed levy.

Petition and Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment On December 21, 2016, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of detennination) for the year in issue, sustaining the levy notice to collect petitioner's overstated withholding for 2009, because "[w]e could not reach an agreement, extend any reliefto you, or even consider any alternative to the proposed levy.

SERVED Jun 05 2017 - 2 - [*2] Revenue Service (IRS or respondent) to uphold a notice ofintent to levy as set forth in a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetenmination), dated September 17, 2014, for petitioner's taxable period ending December 31, 2013.

"[N]othing in section 6320 or 6330 prohibits the filing of an NFTL, even while a taxpayer's account is considered to be in CNC status." Shenk v.

- 3 - [*3] April 23, 2009, respondent issued to petitioners a Notice ofFederal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC Section 6320 for 2003 (NFTL filing).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION CHIECHI, Judge: This case arises from a petition filed in response to respective notices ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330¹ dated December 18, 2013 (collectively, notices ofdetermin- ¹All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all (continued...) SERVED Jul 03 2017 - 2 - [*2] ation), as supplemented by respective supplemental notices ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under

On October 21, 2015, IRS Appeals issued a "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code", which sustained the filing ofthe notice ofFederal tax lien.

SO 3(...continued) Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320 (lien notice), dated October 14, 2014, concerning petitioner's unpaid Federal income tax for 2003 and 2004 and (2) a CDP hearing request pertaining to the lien notice, mailed by petitioner to respondent on November 7, 2014.

Notice ofDetermination On August 30, 2013, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the - 12 - [*12] lien filing.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Conceming Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated April 10, 2012.

On February 10, 2016, SO Taylor issued to petitioner a Supplemental Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy for 2010 (supplemental notice ofdetermination).

- 5 - [*5] On May 14, 2013, respondent issued to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) for their taxable years 2003, 2004, and 2005, sustaining the proposed levy.

Notice ofDetermination On June 3, 2014, the IRS Office ofAppeals issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) for the years in issue.

In September 2012, Appeals sent petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue -7- [*7] Code (initial determination).

MEMORANDUM OPINION JACOBS, Judge: These consolidated cases were commenced in response to Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 ¹Cases ofthe following petitioners are consolidated herewith: Salvador Santana, Sr., docket Nos.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: This case arises from a petition for review filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) in which respondent sustained a notice ofintent to levy with respect to petitioner's Federal income tax liabilities SERVED Mar 13 2017 - 2 - [*2] for the 2006 and 2008 tax years.¹ Petitioner is challenging respondent's determination for the 2008 tax year only.

On September 17, 2014, IRS Appeals issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner sustaining the proposed levy for petitioner's taxable quarter ended December 31, 2013 (notice ofdetermination).

MEMORANDUM OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Conceming Collections Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated May 11, 2016.

MEMORANDUM OPINION JACOBS, Judge: These consolidated cases were commenced in response to Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 ¹Cases ofthe following petitioners are consolidated herewith: Salvador Santana, Sr., docket Nos.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PUGH, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330,¹ i Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and in effect at all relevant times.

itutes for returns and assessing the employment taxes for the periods at issue, the IRS mailed to P a notice ofthe filing ofa notice ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) and a levy notice with respect to the periods at issue. P timely requested and received a sec. 6320/6330 hearing with the IRS Appeals Office. The Appeals Office subsequently issued two notices ofdetermination sustaining the NFTL filing and the proposed levy for the periods at SERVED Jan 21 2016 - 2 - issue except the NFTL filing for P's De

tence or amount ofthe underlying tax liability in their CDP hearing ifthey did not receive a statutory notice of deficiency or did not otherwise have the opportunity to dispute the liability.24 While the term "underlying liability" is not defined in section 6320 or 6330, we have interpreted this term "to include any amounts owed by a taxpayerpursuant to the tax laws."25 Further, we have previously upheld regulations promulgated by the Secretarythat define a prior opportunity to dispute the under

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION GALE, Judge: Pursuant to sections 6320(c) and 6330(d), petitioner petitioned the Court to review a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination letter) issued to him by the Internal Revenue Service Office ofAppeals (Appeals).

MEMORANDUM OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Conceming Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated November 12, 2014.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: This case arises from a petition forjudicial review filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) in which respondent determined to sustain a lien filing with respect to petitioner's liabilities listed SERVED Nov 02 2016 - 2 - [*2] below.¹ Respondent determined that petitioner was liable for trust fund recovery penalties (TFRPs) for each ofthe following

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This collection due process (CDP) case was commenced in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code dated February 19, 2015, upholding a proposed collection action regarding petitioner's SERVED Jul 19 2016 - 2 - [*2] unpaid tax liability for tax year 2012.

The taxpayer timely filed a Collection Due Process (CDP) Hearing Request under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 6320, in response to the Letter 3172, Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing.

On July 19, 2013, Appeals sent to petitioner a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (decision letter).

MEMORANDUM OPINION RUWE, Judge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Conceming Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) with respect to petitioner's 2006 and 2008 Federal SERVED Apr 25 2016 - 2 - [*2] income tax liabilities.¹ The remaining issue for decision is whether the settlement officer abused her discretion by sustaining the proposed levy action concerning petitioner's 2006 tax liability.

This case arises from a petition for review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

On October 22, 2012, SO1 sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), sustaining the lien filings and proposed levies.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION NEGA, Judge: The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Appeals Office sent petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) with respect to notices of Federal tax lien (NFTLs) and notices ofintent to levy filed to collect petitioners' unpaid self-reported tax liabilities for 2008-11.

R mailed P a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM OPINION PUGH, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Conceming Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination), sustaining respondent's notice ofintent to levy to collect petitioner's unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 (the subject years).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION JACOBS, Judge: These consolidated cases were commenced in response to Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 ¹These cases were consolidated for purposes oftrial, briefing, and opinion by order ofthe Court dated June 8, 2016.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION JACOBS, Judge: These consolidated cases were commenced in response to Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 ¹These cases were consolidated for purposes oftrial, briefing, and opinion by order ofthe Court dated June 8, 2016.

Respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (notice ofdetermination) on January 16, 2015, in which the lien and the proposed levy action were sustained.

The Macks may in the future raise issues ofcollectibility at a CDP hearing before IRS Appeals under section 6320 or 6330, and thejudicial appeal ofan IRS determination in such a hearing would lie in this Court.

On October 22, 2012, SO1 sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), sustaining the lien filings and proposed levies.

SERVED Mar 03 2016 - 2 - [*2] Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated November 26, 2013, respondent determined to proceed with a proposed levy to collect petitioner's outstanding employment tax liabilities from Form 940, Employer's Annual Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Return, for 2010 and Forms 941, Employer's Quarterly Federal Tax Return, for the quarterly periods ending June 30, Se

MEMORANDUM OPINION PUGH, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320¹ and/or 6330, ¹ Unless otherwise indicated all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and in effect at all relevant times.

On July 31, 2015, Appeals issued to each petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 concerning their income tax liability for taxable year 2010.

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining both the filing ofa notice ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) to secure petitioners' unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, and SERVED Apr 28 2016 - 2 - [*2] 2006 (years in issue) andjeopardy levy actions to collect those liabilities.

On December 23, 2013, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (notice ofdetermination).

On December 16, 2013, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy.

On October 22, 2012, SO1 sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), sustaining the lien filings and proposed levies.

The controversybefore the Court arises from respondent's determination to proceed with collection by the filing ofa notice ofFederal tax lien under section 6320 with respect to petitioner's 2007, 2010, and 2011 tax liabilities and frivolous return penalties for 2007, 2008, and 2009.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to two Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

- 7 - [*7] preferred to conduct the section 6320/6330 hearing through correspondence, and neither he nor another representative participated in a telephone conference.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code dated November 14, 2014, upholding a proposed collection action for tax years 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2013.

295, 303-304 (2012) (holding that the Court hasjurisdiction pursuantto section 6404(h) when the Secretary's determination regarding interest abatement is memorialized in a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330), supplemented by 140 T.C.

On May 11, 2011, respondent issued to petitioners individuallyNotices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) sustaining the proposed levy for their 2005 tax year.9 The notice ofdetermination advised petitioners that their OICs could not be considered because of"failure to make periodic payments during the offer processing." Petitioners timely filed a petition with the Tax Court.

4177-13L in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) upholding collection actions SERVED Jun 11 2015 - 2 - [*2] regarding an employmenttax deficiency of$1,073 for tax year 2006.¹ Petitioner commenced the case at docket No.

MEMORANDUM OPINION ARMEN, Special Trial Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review ofa Notice OfDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).' Petitioner seeks review of respondent's determination to proceed with a proposed levy to collect trust fund recovery penalties (TFRPs) assessed pursuantto section 6672 for the four calendar quarters ended December 31, 2006, and March 31, June 30, and December 31, 2007 (taxable per

Having heard nothing from petitioner or his representative, the SO on November 29, 2012, sustained the proposed levy by issuing a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

The petition was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

Respondent issued petitioner aNotice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated January 24, 2014, denying petitioner's requested collection alternative and sustaining the proposed collection action.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) upholding proposed collection actions regarding petitioner's unpaid tax penalties for tax years 2002 and 2003 and income tax SERVED Nov 03 2015 - 2 - [*2] liabilities for tax years 2006-08.

Upon disposition ofthis motion, respondent intends to file a motion to remand for a hearing on the levy." The notice ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (notice ofdetermination) which respondent issued to petitioner and upon which this case is based addresses only the "notice ofFederal tax lien filing and your right to a hearing under IRC 6320" that respondent issued to petitioner with respect to his taxable years 2000, 2004,

This case was commenced in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) upholding a proposed levy regarding petitioners' unpaid tax liabilities for tax years 2010 and 2011.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION NEGA, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) upholding collection actions regarding penalties under SERVED JUL 2 8 2015 - 2 - [*2] section 6694(b) of$17,361 and $17,000 for tax years 2003 and 2004, respectively.¹ The issues for consideration are (1) whether petitioner is entitled to raise his underlying liability for section 6694(b) pena

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: Respondent sent petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330¹ (notice of ¹ Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules ofPractice and Procedure.

On July 30, 2013, the IRS issued petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.5 Petitioners, while residing in Montana, timely petitioned this Court for review ofthe determination.

On May 12;2011, by a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination), Appeals Team Manager Darryl Lee provided petitioner with the following "Summary of Determination": Based on the available facts, the applicable laws and administrative procedures were followed and the filing ofthe Notice ofFederal Tax Lien was proper and appropriate.

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review ofa Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated January 14, 2013.

Background On July 16, 2013, respondent mailed petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) informing petitioners that respondent would proceed with the collection by levy ofpetitioners' unpaid Federal income tax for 2008, 2009, and 2011.

MEMORANDUM OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code dated February 26, 2014, upholding a proposed levy collection action for tax years 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, and 2008 SERVED JUL 1 3 2015 - 2 - [*2] (tax years at issue).

On May 2, 2013, the IRS issued a notice ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the notice ofintent to levy.

4177-13L in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) upholding collection actions SERVED Jun 11 2015 - 2 - [*2] regarding an employmenttax deficiency of$1,073 for tax year 2006.¹ Petitioner commenced the case at docket No.

- 6 - On September 16, 2014, the SO sent petitioner by certified mail a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy and informing him ofhis right to file a petition with the Court within 30 days.

The SO thereupon closed the case and, on April 14, 2014, the IRS sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the levy.

The IRS Appeals Office therefore issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated April 30, 2012, sustaining the proposed levy and NFTL for the employment tax liabilities.¹° The notice ofdetermination stated that petitioner was liable for employment taxes on the basis of"wage information obtained from the State of New Mexico" and that he was not entitled to challenge the un

On September 13, 2013, the IRS sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the NFTL filing for 2003-2005.

.The SO accordingly closed the case and, on August 20, 2013, the IRS issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the levy.

On November 4, 2013, the settlement officer issued the Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under - 5 - [*5] Section 6320 sustaining the lien filing because Mr.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION MARVEL, Judge: In a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330¹ (notice ofdetermination), respondent ¹Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code) as amended and in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules ofPractice and Procedure.

This allegedly made it impossible for them to determine their correct Federal tax liabilities for 2005-2008.2 The SO was unpersuaded by petitioners' arguments and, on May 30, 2012, the IRS issued them a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the notice oftax lien filing.

On April 15, 2013, the IRS issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Con- cerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the NFTL filing and proposed levy action.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) for tax years 2003, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 (years at issue).

Borre) should not be held responsible for any 2007 liabilities since he "was gone from [the] business 12/31/2006": He "walked away from the business and some ofthe people he was working with took it over." - 14 - [*14] On August 10, 2012, Appeals issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (sometimes, notice) to petitioner.

On July 16, 2014, respondent sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

295, 303-304 (2012) (holding that the Court hasjurisdiction pursuantto section 6404(h) when the Secretary's determination regarding interest abatement is memorialized in a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330), supplemented by 140 T.C.

On April 10, 2014, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action.

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review ofa Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330,¹ dated May 1, 2013, for petitioner's taxable years 2003 and 2004 ¹Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax (continued...) SERVED Sep 16 2015 - 2 - [*2] (notice ofdetermination).

SEMED MAR 1 6 2015 - 2 - [*2] MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HALPERN, Judge: This case is before us to review a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice) issued by the Internal Revenue Service Appeals Office (Appeals).

On December 16, 2014, respondent issued the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy with respect to petitioner's unpaid TFRPs.

SO Matthews subsequently closed petitioner's case, and on September 26, 2013, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collective Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) for the years at issue, upholding the filing ofthe NFTL.

[she] send * * * [him] a certified assessment of how * * * [she has] now came [sic] up with this alleged amount & the name ofthe person or persons preparing it", and a letter dated October 23, 2009, and addressed to "Tax Collector" that requests a section 6320/6330 hearing and is accompanied by an attachment ofmaterials thatpetitioner received from the PatriotNetwork.9 Petitioner did not provide Revenue Agent Pritchard with any books or records because he did not maintain any books or records a

MEMORANDUM OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code dated May 2, 2013, upholding a proposed levy collection action for tax year 2008.

MEMORANDUM OPINION GOEKE, Judge: Petitioners petitioned this Court under section 6320¹ and/or 6330 for review ofrespondent's determination to uphold the filing ofa ¹Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as amended and in effect at all relevant times.

295, 303-304 (2012) (holding that the Court has jurisdiction pursuant to section 6404(h) when the Secretary’s determination regarding interest abatement is memorialized in a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330), supplemented by 140 T.C.

On December 14, 2011, the IRS issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy.4 Petitioner, while residing in Idaho, timely petitioned this Court for review ofthe notice ofdetermination.

Tucker a "Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330", which formally rejected his OIC and determined to proceed with the proposed levy and the notice ofFederal tax lien to collect his unpaid liability for 2009.

On December 8, 2011, Appeals issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice).

This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) dated June 20, 2013.

Respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy to Mr.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION CHIECHI, Judae: This case arises from a petition filed in response to a notice ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330¹ dated May 9, 2012, with respect to petitioners' taxable year 2007.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, J_udge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) for tax years 2004, 2005, and 2006.

On July 19, 2011, after consulting with her ATM, the SO issued to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action for the years in issue.

She accordingly closed the case, and, on May 8, 2012, the IRS sent petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the levy.

CHIECHI, Judge: These cases arise from petitions filed in response to respective notices ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330¹ dated November 3, 2011, and June 25, 2012, with respect to petitioner's taxable years 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009.

On April 3, 2013, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 upholdingthe NFTL filing and levy notice (adjusted for petitioners' withholding credit fortax year 2006).

On April 21, 2011, the IRS sentpetitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for tax years 2005 and 2006.

Consistent with the SO's determination, on July 18, 2012, IRS Appeals Office Team Manager Deborah Ross approved and issued to the Foundation a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy action.

MEMORANDUM OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated September 19, 2012, upholding .

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (decision letter) upholding a collection action regarding a notice ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) filed on March 15, 2011, for the tax SERVED Oct 16 2014 -2- [*2] period ending June 30, 1992.

SEC T.C. Memo. 2014-183 UNITED STATES TAX COURT PATRICIA L. LANG, Petitionery. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 24966-12L. Filed September 8, 2014. P filed a petition for review ofa lien notice filing pursuantto I.R.C. sec. 6320 in(response to R's determinations that the collection actions were appropriate. Held: P is not eligible to contest the underlying tax liability. Held, further, R's determinations are sustained. Patricia L. Lang, pro se. Priscilla A. Parrett, for re

CHIECHI, Judge: These cases arise from petitions filed in response to respective notices ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330¹ dated November 3, 2011, and June 25, 2012, with respect to petitioner's taxable years 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009.

On June 2, 2010, the IRS Office ofAppeals mailed petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) informing them that the IRS' determination to levy on petitioners' assets was sustained.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to petitioners' Federal income tax liabilities for 2008, 2009, and 2010.

MEMORANDUM OPINION KERRIGAN, J_udge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 ggED JUL 1 4 2014 - 2 - [*2] and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) issued January 24, 2013,' upholding a proposed levy collection action for taxyears 2006, 2007, and 2008.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 that sustained a proposed levy to collect petitioners' unpaid Federal income tax liability for 2008.

SERVED MAY 2 2 2014 [*2] Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

As a preliminary matter we note that although the petition in this case is entitled "Petition for Redetermination ofLien or Levy Action under Code Section 6320 and/or 6330(d)", ourjurisdiction is limited to the review ofthe levy action pursuantto section 6330(d).

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to three Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s)under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) upholding collection actions regardingthe following deficiencies and penalties for tax years 1998 and 2000-2008: SERVED JAN 1 3 2014 - 2 - [*2] Penalty Year Deficiency Sec.

Consistentlywith the SO's determinations, the IRS issued on April 23, 2013, a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 that denied petitioner's requests for collection relief.

On June 28, 2011, respondent sent petitioner a Notice ofFederal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320 (lien notice) for her 2004, 2006, 2008, and 2009 taxable years.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to petitioner's Federal income tax liability for 2010 and unpaid trust fund recovery penalties under section 6672 for quarters ended September 30 and December 31, 2006, March 31, 2007, December 31, 2008, March 31 and June 30, SERVED NOV 1 7 2014 - 2 - [*2] 2009 (collectively, quarters in issue), and

On June 20, 2006, Settlement Officer Caputo sent petitioner aNotice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) to that effect.

Waltner requested a hearing, and respondent subsequently issued a Notice ofDetermination Conceming Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy.

When petitioner did not respond to this offer, SO1 closed the case and on September 20, 2011, sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the NFTL, Petitioner timely petitioned this Court contending (among other things) that he had not understood SOl's offer to constitute a formal and final collection alternative.

On August 22, 2013, the IRS -4- issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).¹ The issue for decision is whether respondentmay ' Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal (continued...) GERVED JUL 2 3 2014 - 2 - [*2] proceed with collection ofpetitioner's unpaid Federal income tax liability for 2005 by levy.

MEMORANDUM OPINION ARMEN, Special Trial Judge: Petitioners commencedthis case forjudicial review ofa Notice OfDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).¹ See sec.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WELLS, Judge: Petitioner seeks review, pursuantto section 6320, of respondent's determination to proceed with collection ofpetitioner's unpaid employmenttax liabilities for periods ending September 30 and December 31, 2004, and March 31, 2005, and unpaid FUTA tax liabilities for petitioner's 2004 SERVED Jul 30 2014 - 2 - [*2] tax year.¹ We have been asked to decide whetherthe Appeals Office abuse

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judae: This case is before the Court on a petition for review ofa Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

Using all the informationprovided, the settlement officer issued a Corrected Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for petitioner's TFRP liabilities.

The issue petitioner has raised throughoutthis case is that the compensation paid to him by Bradford Schools does not constitute wages within the meaning of _ 4 _ the Internal Revenue Code and therefore that compensation is not subject to Federal income tax.2 Discussion Surnmaryjudgment is intended to expedite litigation and to avoid unnecessary and expensive trials.

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated May 30, 2012, sustaining the levy action.

3 Out-of-pockethealth care 1,377 Court ordered payments 780 Tuition/fees 0 Legal fees 3,900 Taxes 17,726 Credit card payments 0 31,247 On August 6, 2008, the settlement officer issued the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 - 11 - [*11] sustaining respondent's proposed use ofa levy to collect petitioners' outstanding income tax liabilities for 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006.

SSIONEROF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent DIXIE L. POMEROY, Petitioner y. COMMISSIONEROF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent DocketNos. 11640-11L, 11641-11L. Filed January 22, 2013. Ps filed petitions for review ofa notice ofFederal tax lien filing pursuantto I.R.C. sec. 6320 in response to R's determinations that the collection actions were appropriate. Held: We exercise our discretion and remand these cases to IRS Appeals to clarify and supplement the record as the parties deem appropriate to consider P

Nothing furtherwas received from petitioner, and on June 4, 2012, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy to collect petitioner's 2004 income tax liabilities.

Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

* * * [Reproduced literally.] On October 13, 2011, respondent issued to petitioner a notice ofdetermina- tion concerning collection action(s)under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioner's unpaid 2004 liability and petitioner's unpaid 2005 liability.

On December 13, 2011, SO Brewton issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to sustain respondent's collection actions.

respect to the September 30, 2005 quarter and regarding the notice oftax lien with respect to the September 30, 2005 quarter.5 On August 10, 2006, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s)under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) with respect to petitioner's unpaid liability for the September 30, 2005 quarter (notice ofdetermination with respect to the September 30, 2005 quarter).

On August 20, 2012, the IRS issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s)under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Ramdas a "Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330", which rejected his OIC and determined to proceed with the proposed levy to collect his unpaid liability for 2005.

ated his disagreement with a notice ofFederal tax lien filing. The record does not establish that respondent issued to petitioner any such notice with respect to his taxable year 2007. The notice ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under sec. 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) with respect to petitioner's taxable year 2007 on which this case is based addresses solely the notice ofintent to levy that respon-dent issued to petitionerwith respect to his taxable year 2007. 3We sha

MEMORANDUM OPINION NEGA, Judge: This action was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) with respect to petitioner's 2007 and 2008 Federal income tax liabilities.

On January 14, 2011, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) sustaining the proposed levy.

On June 8, 2012, respondentmailed petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the NFTL.

MEMORANDUM OPINION DAWSON, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review of a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and or 6330,1 dated August 26, 2011, to proceed with the levy on petitioner's 'Unless otherwise indicated, all subsequent section references are to the (continued...) SERVED OCT 2 1 2013 - 2 - [*2] property to collect petitioner's unpaid Federal employment tax liabilities (notice ofdetermination).

Respondent issued to petitioner Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices) that sustained proposed levy actions for petitioner's unpaid employment tax liabilities for the periods ending June 30 and September 3, 2010.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION RUWE, Judge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 1All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code) in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules ofPractice (continued...) SERVED APR - 4 2013 - 2 - [*2] The issues for decision are: (1) whetherthe statute oflimitations bars the collection ofpetitioner's tax l

On July 5, 2012, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination), sustaining respondent's lien to collect petitioner's unpaid income tax for 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND.OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 a d/or 6330.1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks review ofrespondent's 1Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, andall Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of (continued...) SERVED DEC 79 2013 -2- [*2] determination to proceed with colle

MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review of a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).1 Petitioner seeks review ofrespondent's rejection ofhis offer-in-compromise and subsequent decision to sustain the filing ofa notice ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) to collect petitioner's unpaid income tax liability for the 1991 tax year.

On March 15, 2012, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s)under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy.

Respondent issued to petitioner Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices) that sustained proposed levy actions for petitioner's unpaid employment tax liabilities for the periods ending June 30 and September 3, 2010.

On May 10, 2011, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed - 9 - [*9] levy.

On June 23, 2010, respondent issued to petitionertwo separate notices of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices ofdetermination).

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WELLS, Judae: Respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On November 22, 2011, the Appeals Offic issued to each petitioner a notice ofdetermination concerning collection action(s)under section 6320 and/or 6330 (collectively, notices ofdetermination) with respect to petitioners' unpaid liabilities at issue.

- 6 - [*6] On April 5, 2011, respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330, upholding the issuance ofa notice ofintent to levy for the tax period ending December 31, 2008.

On November 22, 2011, fespondent issued to petitioner separate notices of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices ofdetermination), one with respect to each ofthe notice oflevy and the notice oftax lien.

On July 8, 2010, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action for 2005.

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated February 27, 2012, sustaining the levy action.

Petitioners invoked the Court'sjurisdiction by filing a petition forjudicial review ofa Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judae: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Actions(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination)-datedOctòber 14, 2011.

For a taxpayer seeking review ofa determination under section 6320 or 6330, section 6330(d)(1) provides that the petition must be filed with the Tax Court within 30 days ofthe determination regardless ofwhether the underlying tax liability is at issue.

On November 18, 2011, SO Reubel sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the collection.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 that sustained a levy to collect petitioners' unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for 2002 and 2009.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION RUWE, J_uudge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 1All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times, unless otherwise indicated.

Respondent sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

Petitioner's Section 6320/6330 Hearing On January 20, 2011, respondent mailed to petitioner a Letter 1058, Final Notice ofIntent to Levy and Notice ofYour Right to a Hearing, with respect to petitioner's tax liabilities for 2007 and 2008.

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the filing ofa notice ofFederal tax lien (NFTL) with respect to his unpaid 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 Federal income tax.

The filing is upheld." Three days later, the determination followed, in the form ofa - 7 - [*7] Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice).2 When he filed the petition, petitioner resided in New York State.

On March 2, 2012; the Appeals Office accordingly issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the -6- [*6] proposed levy.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated June 27, 2012, upholding a proposed levy collection action for tax periods ending September 30 and December 31, SERVED Aug 27 2013 - 2 - [*2] 2008, and September 30 and December 31, 2009.

On January 4, 2013, the IRS issued to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levies.

Appeals also did not process petitioner's Form 941 for the period ending December 31, 2005, and thus did not apply the claimed $12,683 overpayment towards its outstanding employment tax liabilities.3 On September 22, 2011, the IRS issued to petitioner two Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levies.

On July 8, 2010, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action for 2005.

SSIONEROF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent DIXIE L. POMEROY, Petitioner y. COMMISSIONEROF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent DocketNos. 11640-11L, 11641-11L. Filed January 22, 2013. Ps filed petitions for review ofa notice ofFederal tax lien filing pursuantto I.R.C. sec. 6320 in response to R's determinations that the collection actions were appropriate. Held: We exercise our discretion and remand these cases to IRS Appeals to clarify and supplement the record as the parties deem appropriate to consider P

Appeals also did not process petitioner's Form 941 for the period ending December 31, 2005, and thus did not apply the claimed $12,683 overpayment towards its outstanding employment tax liabilities.3 On September 22, 2011, the IRS issued to petitioner two Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levies.

- 5 - [*5] On May 12, 2011, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner at petitioner's Old Tanyard Road address a notice ofdetermination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to petitioner's taxable year 2003 (notice ofdetermination).

On January 21, 2009, respondent issued to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy.

Informed him that I needed a currentprognosis especially since he has had income for the last three tax years." On May 1, 2008, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy.

To the extent practicable, a hearing requested under section 6320 is to be held in conjunction with a related hearing requested under section 6 30.

On November 8, 2010, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining that respondent followed all legal and procedural requirements in the filing ofthe NFTL.

The proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On July 24, 2009, respondent issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice), sustaining the filing ofthe NFTL with respect to petitioner's unpaid liabilities for 2004 and 2005.

On March 3, 2010, respondent mailed two Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

6320(c) provides that "For purposes ofthis section, subsections (c), (d) (other than paragraph (2)(B) thereof), (e), and (g) ofsection 6330 shall apply." - 10 - Petitioner attempted to raise the underlying liabilities for the 2006 and 2008 civil penalties, but the SO refused to consider petitioner's arguments because t

Section 6330(c)(4)(A) provides: Certain issues precluded.--An issue may not be raised at the hearing if-- (A)(i) the issue was raised and considered at a previous hearing under section 6320 or in any other previous administrative orjudicial proceeding; and (ii) the person seeking to raise the issue participated meaningfully in such hearing or proceeding * * * - 6 - Thesé sections adoptithe generally recognized doctrines ofresjudicata and collateral estoppel inithe collection due process category

Section 6320 regarding petitioners' unpaid Federal income tax for both 2001 and 2007. 2All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules ofPractice and Procedure. - 3 - [*3] On June 15, 2009, petitioners filed a Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Proces

I request reliefunder IRC §§ 6320/6330 from the proposed collection action.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PARIS, Judge: This case arises from a petition forjudicial review filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under SERVED MAY 16 2012 - 2 - Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The only issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with the proposed levy action to collect petitioner's income tax liabilities for tax years 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2003 as well as trust fund recovery penalty assessments for the first and second qua

On or about December 17, 2009, respondent's Appeals Office issued to petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination), sustaining the NFTL.

13619-07L: DECISION Pursuant to the agreement ofthe parties in this case, it is ORDERED AND DECIDED: That the determinations set forth in the Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under section 6320 and/or section 6330 issued to petitioner on May 15, 2007, regarding petitioner's liability for penalties under I.R.C.

The Notice ofDetermination On July 1, 2010, respondent's Appeals Office issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) for tax years 2006 and 2007.

On Névember 19, 2009, respondent sent petitionerthree Notices of Determinati n Concerning Collection Action(s) Uiìder Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining tl e two notices oflien and the final notice.

The settlement officer further advised petitionerthat he would be ineligible for collection alternatives ifhe did not file his outstanding returns On July 5, 2011, Appeals sent petitioner a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (decision letter) upholding the levy notice and the subsequent levy.

On September 9, 2011, SO Vander Linden sentto petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the levy action.

On March 10, 2010, the settlement officer issued a Supplemental Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (supplemental notice ofdetermination) denying petitioner's request for interest abatement.

On November 24, 2009, after more than five months from receipt of petitioner's June 15, 2009, letter, and without receiving any further information or communications from petitioner, respondent's settlement officer issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining respondent's proposed levy action.

Deihl a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection¼ction(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330* sustaining respondent's proposed levy.

On June 15, 2010, respondent's Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 upholdingthe NFTL as properly filed.

Respondent issued petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice) that sustained a proposed levy action for 2004.

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated December 10, 2010, sustaining the levy action.

On July 28, 2008, Appeals sent petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) rejecting the amended OIC and sustaining the proposed levy.

- 8 - The February 8, 2008, Decision Letter On February 8, 2008, respondent mailed to petitioner a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ofthe Internal Revenue Code (decision letter) and attached a "Summary and Recommendation" prepared by Mr.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION KERRIGAN, hgige: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination) dated March 10, 2011, upholding a proposed levy collection action for tax years 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.

SEC T.C. Memo. 2012-210 UNITED S'TATES TAX'COURT PHILIP C. LEIBOLD, Petitioneri. COMMISSIONEROF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 6229-10L. Filed July 24, 2012. P filed a petition for review ofa lien filing pursuantto I.R.C. sec. 6320 in response to R's determinatiðn thaïthe collection action was appropriate. Held: R's determination is sustained. Philip C. Leibold, pro se. Jessica R. Browde and ZacharyA. Sharpe, for respondent. SERVED Jul24 2012 -2- MEMORAl%DUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

On or about June 14, 2005, respondent mailed petitioner Letter 3172, Notice ofFederal Tax Lien Filing & Yo r Right to a Hearing Under IRC § 6320 (notice ofFederal tax lien).

By two Notices ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, respondent's Appeals Office (Appeals) sustained a proposed levy to collect petitioners' assessed but unpaid self-employmenttaxes, penalties, and interest for 1995, 1996, and 1999.

On April 5, 2010, the settlement officer issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s)Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice) sustaining the notice ofFederal tax lien filing and proposed levy action.

On November 16, 2006, the Appeals officer issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy.

Petitioners never submitted the Form 433-A, and on November 3, 2010, respondent's Appeals Office mailed to petitioners a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

- 5 - Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the filing ofthe Federal tax lien.

Appeals' determination and Tax Court proceedings On February 24, 2011, Appeals sent to the Salahuddins a "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330", with respect to their income tax liabilities for 2004, 2005, and 2006.

On October 19, 2009, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the notice ofFederal tax lien on the grounds that she raised only frivolous issues and did not present any information that would warrant a withdrawal ofthe notice ofFederal tax lien.

Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 2000.

COLVIN, ChiefJudge: This case is before us to review a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice) is(cid:0)541uebdy respondent's Appeals Office.

|| -3- OPINION GALE, Judge: The petition in this case seeks review ofa Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 63302 issued by respondent's Office ofAppeals (Appeals).

Brombach responded by asking for a collection due process (CDP) hearing under section 6320.1 In the request, he challenged the amount oftax the Commissioner said he owed and asked for reassurance that the lien would not be applied against his wife's interest in theirjoint property.2 1 Unless otherwise noted all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times.

That determination, reflected in a "Notice ofDetermination Conceming Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330" dated December 16, 2010, was made after Appeals conducted a collection due process ("CDP") hearing pursuant to section 6330(c).

Deihl a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection¼ction(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330* sustaining respondent's proposed levy.

On December 14, 2010, Appeals issued a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining th'e proposed levy to collect the civil penalties and interest at issue.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION MARVEL, Judge: Respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 1 1Unless otherwise indicated, all section references arel to the Internal Revenue Code (Code), as amended.

MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review ofa Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).1 Petitioners seek review ofrespondent's determinationto proceed with a proposed levy and respondent's denial oftheir request for abatement ofadditions to tax.

Hoyt to have acted fraudulently * * * argu[ing] that ifthe IRS had done so the Tax Court case would have reached a 'conclusion' earlier." On December 31, 2008, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

IMTS' request for a section 6320/6330 hearing subsequentlywas assigned to Settlement Officer Jeffrey L.

On May 5, 2011, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to the years in issue.

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated January 27, 2011, determining not to grant reliefunder section 6330 and sustaining the levy action.

- 6 - On January 31, 2008, respondent issued a Notice of Determinat on Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action.

On November 27, 2007, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of - Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy.

-4 - On February 2, 2011, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining that petitioner would not be granted relieffrom the NFTL and that petitioner did not qualify for withdrawal ofthe notice as allowed for by section 6323(j).

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 dated January 10, 2011, sustaining the proposed levy to aid in the collection ofher income tax liabilities for taxable years 2004 and 2006.

On November 30, 2007, respondent's Äppeals Office mailed petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination), sustaining the levy action._ The notice of determination stated that, according to respondent's records, petitioner had not filed his 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006 U.S..Individual Income Tax Returns.

Petitioner, instead ofproviding the requested documentation, sent Officer Cook 50 pages filled with.arguments that this Court has long considered frivolous On May 11, 2011, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination ConcerningCollection Action(s) Under Section 6320 (notice ofdetermination) sustaining the NFTL.

On May 25, 2010, respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice), sustaining the proposed levy.

In a.Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330,.dated November 29, 2010 (notice), respondent determined that the NFTL is an appropriate collection action with respect to the underlying liabilities.

MEMORAÑDUM OPINION KERRIGAN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice ofDetermination Concerni g Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 dated April 4, 2011, upholding a proposed levy collection action for tax years 2000, 2003, and 2004.

Discussion Rule 121(a) provides that either party may move for summaryjudgment upon all or any part ofthe legal issues in controversy.

1 8 2012 - 2 - [*2] MEMORANDUMFINDINGS OF FACT AND OPlNION WHERRY, Judae: This case is before the Court on a petition filed on April 26,.2010, and amended on June 30, 2010, for review ofa Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), issued on March 23, 2010.1 Petitioner seeks review ofrespondent's determinations to proceed with his levy for the 1991 through 1997 tax years and for his determination to proceed with a levy and the

On March 24, 2011, respondent issued petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining - that respondent followed all legal-and procedural requirements in the issuance of the notice oflevy and the filing ofthe.NFTL.

On March 1, 2011, respondent issued to petitioner a notice ofFederal tax lien filing and your right to a hearing under section 6320 (notice oftax lien) with respect to his unpaid 2005 liability.

Petitioner never submitted a completed Form 433-A, and on February 28, 2011, respondent's Appeals Office mailed to petitioner a Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

Section 6320 regarding petitioners' unpaid Federal income tax for both 2001 and 2007. 2All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules ofPractice and Procedure. - 3 - [*3] On June 15, 2009, petitioners filed a Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Proces

On or about June 14, 2005, respondent mailed petitioner Letter 3172, Notice ofFederal Tax Lien Filing & Yo r Right to a Hearing Under IRC § 6320 (notice ofFederal tax lien).

Crear determined that it was appropriate to sustain the NFTL; and according to the case activity report, she decided at that time to issue the Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).

ERVED AUG 3 0 2012 I - 2 - [*2] MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review ofa Notice ofDetermination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice ofdetermination).1 Petitioner seeks review ofrespondent's determination to proceed with a proposed levy with respect to his 2006 tax year.

Respondent sent petitioner a Notice of.Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining respondent's proposed levy on December 31, 2008.

seny o oct 2 4 2011 - 2 - Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320/6330 (the notice).

T.C. Memo. 2011-247 UNITED STATES TAX COURT ELDO KLINGENBERG, Petitioner y. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 15355-09L. Filed Octqber 20, 2011. P filed a petition for beview of ^a lieri filíng pursuant to sec. 6320, I.R.C., ln response to R's determination that the collection action was appropriate. Held: R' s determination is sustained. Gary L. Zerman, for petitioner. Naiah J. Shariff, for respondent. SERVED OCT 2 0 2011 - 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERR

MEMORANDUM OPINION RUWE, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 The issues for decision are: (1) Whether respondent abused his IUnless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Accordingly, on July 10, 2009, respondent issued petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or.6330 with regard to 2004.

- 14 - section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination)* with respecti to petitioner's taxable years 200Ó, 2001,. 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and:2007.. That notice stated in pertinent part: "We have, determined that the Final Notice-- Notice of Intent .to Levy was appropriate under the circumstances . " The. notice of determination included an attachment t

Consequently, petitioner was entitled to receive, and received, a section 6320/6330 hearing with respect to the lien notice .

Respondent sent a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioners with respect to a lien filed to collect petitioners' unpaid tax liabilities for their 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1994, and 1995 tax years.

- 2 - Financial & Insurance Company'-s (Pacific West) unpaid employment tax liability for the fourth quarter of 2003.2 These determinations were made in a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated July 19, 2007 (the notice).

Barry's request for a face-to-face hearing and issued Ms.,Barry a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) dated October 7, 2008.

ayer"refuses to pay*the assessment, the IRS can then seize the próperty of the taxpayer-through its power of levy." Before case will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction to the extent that the case places at issue any determination of the IRS under sec. 6320 regarding the filing of a -lien with respect to the (continued...) ?(....continued) liability of Atkins for income taxes for the year 2000. So much of the pleadings will'be stricken as relate to any determination of the IRS under sec. 6320

MEMORANDUM OPINION KROUPA, Judge: These ,consolidated cases are before the Court to address a collection review matter in reäponse to a Notice of Determination Coñce ning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 63301 (determination notice) and to address All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, (continued...) SERVED JUL -5 200 - 2 - an interest abatement action únder section 6404 (e) .2 We are asked to decide two issues.

On April 21, 2009, respondent'«s Appeals Office- issued petitioner the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the notice of intent to levy.

lindi 351941=.%e&- -| slim...- Ep JUN 1 5 2011 - 2 - Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for petitioners' taxable year 2005.1 On September 3, 2007, respondent sent petitioners separate Letters 1058, Final Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice=of Your Right "to a Hearing, regarding their unpaid income tax liability for 2005.

genvao Aus 1 s 2011 - 2 - The petition was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM OPINION SWIFT, Judge: Under section 6320, petitioners challenge respondent's notice of determination rejecting petitioners' proposed collection alternative of an installment agreement relating to petitioners' approximate total of $350,000 in outstanding Federal income tax liabilities for 2000 through 2006.

reduced his credit score by 100 points, affecting his eligibility for a loan, and he told her that the lien was "counter-productive to both * *:* [respondent] and myself [because] [i]t stops me from getting additional financing - 6 - on my house." After the hearing, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or' 6330 dated July 30, 2009, sustaining t e lien.

In a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Nearing Under Section 6320 dated August 31, 2006, the IRS stated that Mrs.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HALPERN, Judge: This case is before us to review a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice) issued by respondent's Appeals Office (Appeals).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION RUWE, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection SERVED Jul 13 2011 - 2 - Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 The issues for decision are whether respondent assessed the correct amount of petitioner's underlying income tax liability for 2002 and, if so, whether respondent abused his discretion in sustaining the notice of intent to levy for petitioner's unpaid in

«By filing the notice of federal táx lien therIRS triggered Slingsby' a rightitä request a hearing under section 6320.3 In his hearing -request' Slingsby wrote that the reason .he-disagreed with the ifiling offthe lien was é a "miscalculation of takes and penalties".

Brian Joseph Talaske (petitioner) filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining a proposed levy for 2005.

Magee issued a Supplemental Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION MARVEL, Judge: Respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 63301 (notice of determination) to collect by levy additions to.tax Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code), as amended, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

On June 12, 2009, Appeals issued to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actiog(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining; the proposed levy.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of D DEC 1 4 2011 - 2 - determination) for 2002 through 2005 (years at issue).1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks review of respondent's determination.

Freeman was entitled to request an administrat,ive hearing unders section 6320 (b) (1) -.

Busche its "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330", ·which stated in part: The Appeals office has determined that the Notice of Intent to Levy was appropriately issued based on applicable laws and procedures.

After the hearing, an Appeals offiicer must determine whether and how to proceed with collection, taking into account, among other things, collection alternatives the taxpayer proposed and whether any proposed collectiön actio balances the need for the efficient collection of taxes with the legitimate concern of the taxpayer that the

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WELLS, Judge : Respondent' s Appeals Office sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respe,ct to a notice of Federal tax lien (NFTL) filed to collect petitioner's unpaid tax liabilities for his 1995, 1996, 1997, D DEC 2 2 200 - 2 - 1999, 2000, 2001, 2005 and 2006 tax years.1 The issue we must decide is whether respondent's Appeals Office abused its discretion by

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT 1AND OPINION PARIS, Judge: On December 14, 2009, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320( and/or 6330 (notice of determination) which sustainèd the filing of a notice of intent to levy for taxable years 2005 and 2006.

Section 6320 affords taxpayers the right to a fair hearing upon the filing of a notice of lien while section 6330 provides the same right when a notice of levy has been issued. This Court has jurisdiction under section 6330(d) (1) to review the Appeals officer's determinations. A lien arises after a taxpayer's tax liability has been properly assess

On August 25, 2009, Appeals issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, and a supporting attachment (notice of determination).

This case is before the Court on a petition for review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination) .

On March 27, 2007, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s)| Under Section 6320 and/or.6330 sustaining the proppsed collection action relating to the years in issue.

On October 24, 2006, the IRS Appeals Office issued to each petitioner a separate Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (initial notice of determination).

RUWE, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 We must decide whether to sustain the determination by respondent's Appeals Office to collect petitioner's unpaid income tax liability for tax year 2005 by levy.

85890 ££1 3.2011 - 2 - WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 Petitioner seeks review of respondent's determination to proceed with a proposed levy.

On April 29, 2009, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of'Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the determination notice), sustaining the NFTL.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) issued to petitioner.1 The issues for 1Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued.

.On October 9, 2008, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination).

Barba mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy.

SERVED JAN 2 7 201 MEMCRANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for j dicial review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Colle tion Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .1 The Estate of Joseph Mangiardi, Deceased, Josepl L.

SEP 3 0 2010 -2- any material fact with respect to this collection review matter and that respondent's Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination notices) pertaining to trust fund recovery penalties (TFRPs) assessed against petitioner for the taxable periods ending December 2004, March 2005, Júne 2005, September 2005, December 2005 and June 2006 (periods at issue) should be sustained.

On June 18, 2009, a manager in respondent's Appeals Office sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 633.0 regarding the proposed levy action for 2000.

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judge: On February 6, 2009, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) which sustained'respondent's proposed levy to collect petitioner' s assessed liabilities for trust fund recovery penalties for tax periods ending March 31, June 30, and September SERVED NOV - 2 2010 - 2 - 30, 2007.

MEMORANDUM OPINION ARMEN, Special Trial Judge : The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .1 The issue for decision is whether responden t 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all subsequent section (continued .

MEMORANDUM OPINION KROUPA, Judge: This collection review matter is before the Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330' (determination notice) .

Respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to-a Hearing Under Section 6320 (CDP notice) on November 8, 2006 .

_ _ 5 On February 4,~ 2008, a manager in respondent's Appeals Office sent petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 regarding liens for 2003-2006 .

Summary Opinion 2010-148, filed October 5, 2010, it is ORDERED AND DECIDED that respondent may proceed with the collection action for the taxable year 2002 as determined in the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated April 16, 2008, upon which this case is based.

Notice of Determination On August 6, 2007, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, with respect to petitioner's tax years 2002, 2003, and 20.04, sustaining the proposed levies for those years (the notice) .

`RUWE, Judge : The petition in this case was filed pursuant to the provisions of section 7463' of the Internal Revenue Code and in response to a Notice of Determination Concernin g Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judge: On April 2, 2008, respondent mailed to petitioner a Noticekof Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ( notice of determination) regarding petitioner ' s 2003 income tax liability .

On June 18, 2008, respondent's Office of Appeals (Appeals) issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s ) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 covering petitioner's 2005 taxable 2The record is unclear as .to when or whether respondent assessed petitioner's employment tax for the last taxable quarter of 2004 .

Respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining that the filing of the notice of Federal tax lien was appropriate.

ble persons for those taxes .and assessed section 6672 penalties against them for the quarterly periods ending December 31, 1999, through December 31, 2002, and for the periods ending December 31, 2003, through September 30, 2004 .2 On September 22, 2004, the`IRS sent petitioners Notices of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your-Right to a Hearing under section 6320 for section 6672`penalties for the quarterly periods ending December 31, 1999, through December 31, 2002 .

On January 18, 2008, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320'and/or 6330 to petitioner .

On April 10, 2007, the Office of Appeals issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy .

Attached to her amende petition were copies of a Notice of Determination Concerni g Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 2006,.

On July 31, 2007, the IRS sent Golditch a "Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC § 6320", notifying him that it had filed a tax lien to secure his tax - 3 - liabilities for the tax years 2001 to 2005.2 Golditch timely requested an administrative hearing regarding the filing of the lien.

This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to petitioner's Federal income tax liabilities for 2002, 2003, and 2004 .

Pitts a "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action ( s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 ." The notice of determination sustained the'filing of the notice of lien .

On June 15, 2007, respondent's Office of Appeals mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the determination), sustaining the Federal tax lien filing and the proposed levy.

With no actual OIC from petitioner, SO Alcorte closed the case and sustained the ,levy in a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s ) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination notice) .

On January 18, 2008, respondent's Appeals office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining respondent's proposed levy .

On September 8, 2008, respondent denied petitioner's request for relief from the proposed levy action by issuing to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), with attachment .

SO Douglas sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination notice) sustaining the proposed levy regarding the four years at issue .

A Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 was issued on April 17, 2009, stating that the tax liability for the tax period ending June 30, 2000, was valid and had not been paid.

Respondent's motion was denied on July 8, (continued...) - 3 - | instant proceeding arises from a pet'ition filed in response to Notices of Determination Concerning Co]lection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 issued separately to each petitioner.

A taxpayer may appeal the filing of a NFTL to the Internal Revenue Service under section 6320 by requesting an administrative hearing.

On October 29, 2007, respondent issued a Notice of, Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to a final notiice o f intent to levy to collect petitioners' unpaid Federal income SERVED May 20 2010 taxes assessed for 2004 and 2005 .1 In response, petitioners timely filed a petition pursuant to section 6330(d) seeking a review of respondent's determinations .

OPINION WELLS, Judge : Respondent sent a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 633 0 (notice of determination) to petitioners with respect to a lien 3 - filed to collect petitioners' unpaid tax liabilities for thei r 1986, 1987, 1988,(1989, 1994, and 1995 tax years .

Petitioners requested a hearing under section 6320, asserting that "the tax liability will be reduced below the .limitation amount designated as the amount for automatic lien levied [sic] .

Respondent sent a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 633 0 (notice of determination) to petitioners with respect to a levy to collect unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for their 1993 , 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000 tax years .

MEMORANDUM OPINION RUWE, Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection SERVED SEP 7 2010 .Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for petitioner's taxable years 2000, 2001 and 2002 .1 This case is before the Court on respondent's motion for summary judgment filed pursuant to Rule 121 .

On June 24, 2008, respondent issued a Notice of Determinatiön Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 2004 (notice of determination).

MEMORANDUM OPINION RUWE, Judge : The petition in this case was-filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .' This case is before the Court on respondent's motion for summary judgment .

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge : This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to petitioner's Federal income tax liabilities for 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 .

MEMORANDUM'FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINIO N DEAN, S ec ial Trial Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice o f determination) .

Petitioner filed the petition :Ua response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 2001 and 2006 from the Memphis Appeals Campus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judge : On July 1, 2008, respondent issued each petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Altion(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 63301 (notices o f 'Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code), and all Rule References are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure .

Garcia mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for judicial review of Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices of determination).1 Petitioner, James Zigmont, seeks judicial review of respondent's.determination to proceed with a filed lien and a proposed levy with respect to petitioner's tax liabilities for taxable years 2002 and 2003.2 The sole issue for decision is - whether respond

SERVED Sep 27 2010 - 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for judicial review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/dr 6330.

MEMORANDUM OPINION GOLDBERG, Special Trial Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION PARIS, Judge: On February 20, 2009, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 which sustained a proposed levy to collect an assessment of petitioner's income tax liability for tax year 2003.

On October 23, 2008, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Unde r Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed lien .

AO Anderson sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination notice) sustaining the lien filing .

Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices of determination) sustaining the proposed levies for income tax liabilities incurred during 2002, 2003, and 2006 of $10,693, $515, and $5,938 respectively and for a section 6672 civil penalty of $667 incurred for the period ending in 2003 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION KROUPA, Judge : This collection review matter is before the Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s)(cid:127)Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 1 'All section references are the Internal Revenue Code, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, unless otherwise indicated .

for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

After the hearing, the IRS issued the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice o f determination) sustaining the proposed levy .

On July 7, 2008, the Appeals office sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the notice of Federal tax lien .

- 5 - On August 6, 2007, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), with respect to petitioner's 2000 tax year, sustaining the proposed levy .

ayer is permitted under section 6320(a)(3)(B) to request a hearing with the .IRS Appeals Office . . Thus, hearings concerning IRS levies are provided for in section 6330, and hearings concerning the filing of a notice of tax lien are provided for in section 6320 . The rules that govern the scope of a lien hearing are borrowed from the statutory provisions that govern a levy hearing . Sec . 6320(c) .8 Section 6330(c)(2) sets forth what issues can be raised by the taxpayer at a levy hearing, and,

On July 31, 2008, two Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 were sent t o petitioner sustaining the lien filing and the proposed levy .

- 8 - On,August 23, 2007, respondent sent petitioner..a Notice'of, Determination Concerning-,Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and 6330 (notice of determination) .

different,-,result..),, For .purposes of 15 involvement with respect to the unpaid tax specified in subsection (a)(3)(A) before the first hearing under this section or section 6320 ." See Perez .

and 19.84, and ,;petitioners timely requested a section 6320 hearing .

Petitioners filed the petition in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 SERVED DEC 2 8 2000 -2- ,(determination notice) .', We are asked to decide whether petitioners may contest the amount of the section 6662(h) penalty for an underpayment attributable to gross valuation misstatements (underpayment penalty) by introducing evidence of a Son of BOSS 2 settlement initiative respondent offered .

5 - On November 21, 2006, respondent's Appeals Office sent eac h petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining respondent's proposed collection actions .

Section 6330(c)(4) and Res Judicata Section 6330(c)(4) precludes a taxpayer from raising in a CDP hearing any "issue" that "was raised and considered at a previous hearing under section 6320 or in any other previous administrative or judicial proceeding ." he Kovaceviches raised--and we did consider--the issue of check 3747 during their deficiency trial .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge : This action was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioners' 2005 Federal income tax liability .

id not petition this Court in response to those notices . Respondent assessed the deficiencies with additions to tax and interest and on March 16, 2001, filed notices of Federal tax lien . Petitioner did not seek review of respondent's actions under section 6320 . Respondent's records indicate that -3- collection due process (CDP) .notices were mailed to petitioner on March 11, 2001 . Petitioner filed a late return for the 2003 tax year .' Respondent determined additions to tax and interest for

On January 24, 2006, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320 (lien notice), informing petitioner that respondent had filed notices of Federal tax lien for tax periods ending September 30, 1998, June 30, 1999, .

Respondent, on December 14, 2 0.06, applied the $25,000 tax payment to petitioners' 1999 tax liability and, on January 12, 2007, issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (initial determination), sustaining the -collection activity relating to 1999, 2000, and 2001 : The initial determination stated that the 1998 overpayment had been forfeited because petitioners "did not claim the refund within the three .

SERVED MAR 2 4 2009 2 - through 2004 (notice of determination) and Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code for 1996 and 1997 (decision letter) .

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) dated June 2, 2008, sustaining the proposed levy action and stating that, because petitioner was not in compliance with filing the required tax returns, a collection alternative could not be considered .

On September 19, 2007, the Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy and rejecting all of petitioner's arguments .

SERVED Aug 05 2009 0 _ 2 _ The petition was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

Petitioner commenced this action in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination) relating t o petitioner's Federal income taxes for 1999, 2002, and 2003 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION HALPERN, Judge : This case is before us to review a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice) issued by respondent's Appeal s Office (Appeals) .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge : This proceeding was-commencedrin response to two Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

Banks a copy of the final .decree in petitioner's bankruptcy case establishing that the bankruptcy case was closed on August 6, 2005 .8 On November 17, 2006, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to 2002 sustaining the proposed levy action .

Respondent's determination was contained in a Notice o f Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 issued after petitioner requested a hearing concerning the proposed levy .

Following the hearing, respondent sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated November 20, 2007,' sustaining the notice of intent to levy for the 2003 unpaid tax liability .

PARIS, Judge : On-January 15,, 2008, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under 'Section 6320 and/or 63301 (notice,-o f determination) for tax years 2002 and 2003 .

Petitioner filed a petition in response to respondent's Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Unde r SERVED -OCT 15200 - 2 - Section 6320 and/or 6330' with respect to petitioner's income tax liabilities for taxable years 2002, 2003, and 2004 .

On January 27, 2006, respondent sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or( 6330 determining that it was appropriate to proceed with the proposed levy .

ner .relating to-the outstanding $260,085 balance in petitioner's 1998 Federal income taxes . On December 17., 2004, respondent notified petitioner of the Federal tax lien filing and of his right to request a collection Appeals Office hearing under section 6320 . Petitioner, however, anxious for relief from respondent's lien filing, on February 22, 2005, requested a withdrawal of respondent's- tax lien filing under respondent's general Collection Appeals Program (CAP) and section 6323(j), not un

Respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 on August 21, 2007 .

Petitioner contends that the stipulation to be bound by the outcome of the test cases (entered into in the deficiency case) does not limit petitioner's right or opportunity to have a hearing under section 6320 and does not limit petitioner's right to question whether the period for assessment had expired when respondent assessed the 1999 tax liability .

On April 10, 2007, the Office of Appeals rejected RLI's arguments and issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining that the IRS could proceed with levy .to recapture the refunds issued to RLI for 1.99a9nd 2000 .

On January 15, 2008, the IRS's Office of Appeals issued the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, which, sustained the proposed levy for 2006 income tax because Mr .

Burke a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

However, because petitioner repeatedly asserted frivolous arguments during his section 6320/6330 hearing and before this Court, we shall decide whether to impose a penalty under section 6673 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION WELLS, Judge: Respondent sent a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioners with .respect to'a notice of lien filed to collect petitioners' unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for tax years 1997 through 2003 .

2 On September 18, 2007, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 upholding respondent's levy .

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

SERVED Jan 26 2009 - 2 - In this collection case under section 6320 petitioner challenges respondent's notice of Federal tax lien filing relating to $70,434 in outstanding Federal employment taxes petitioner owes in .

Martino) (collectively, petitioners), a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under-Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1998, 1999, 2000 , SERVED Feb 24 2009 2 - 2001, and 2002 (first notice of determination), and for 2003 and 2004 (second notice of determination) .

On August il, 2006, .a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 was sent to petitioner.

Under, Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice) with respect to his 2004 income tax liability. The notice stated that Appeals was sustainin g respondent's proposed levy for 2004 .. Discussion I . Abuse of Discretion A . Standard We decide whether Appeals abused its discretion in rejecting petitioner's offers-in-compromise ;and sustaining respondent' s proposed l

Respondent gave petitioners an equivalent hearing regarding the levy, and respondent issued a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code (decision letter) to petitioners sustaining the levy for 2002 .

against Brown regarding his unpaid tax liabilities for the tax years 2001 through 2004 .3 On July 26, 2007, the IRS sent Brown a letter notifying him that the IRS had filed the lien and advising him that he had a right to a collection hearing under section 6320 . Brown requested such a hearing . Brown's case was. assigned to Darlene Caputo, an Appeals officer (the'Appeals officer) at the IRS Branch Office in Memphis, Tennessee . 2 ( . . . continued ) Exhibit 5-J referenced in the brief that the

By Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s ) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination), dated January 15, 2004, respondent's Appeals Office disallowed any abatement of the underlying income tax liability, including 4On or about Nov.

September 21, 2005, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing UnderE,IRC Section 6320 (notice of lien) .

Consequently,` respondent's Appeals Office mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action-(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), on July 20,-2007 .

Respondent objected to petitioner' s motion and moved to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that no notice of determination as authorized by section 6320::or 6330 9~ t has been issued norhas respondent made any other determination S , for the years at issue that would confer jurisdiction on' the Court .

Petitioner was advised of hi right to a hearing under section 6320 with respect to the filing of the lien .

On December 3, 2007, respondent sent to petitioner at his current address in Kentucky a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

On December 18, 2007, respondent mailed to petitioner a ii Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for a tax liability of petitioner for 2004 .

6320` and/or 6330 on November 22, 2006 . The notice of determination stated that : (1) Petitioner did .not present any information to dispute the appropriateness of the proposed levy action ; (2) .he did not submit any documentation to support consideration of collection alternatives ; (3) the SO verified that all legal and procedural requirements

OPINION COHEN, Judge : This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 addressed to "Medical Practice Solutions LLC, Carolyn Britton, Sole Member" (petitioner), with respect to unpaid employment taxes for quarters ended March 31 and June 30, 2006 .

Federal Tax Lien : Section 6320 Procedures If a taxpayer is liable for Federal taxes and fails to pay the taxes after demand, section 6321 creates a lien in favor of the United States on all property and rights to property belonging to the taxpayer .

Notice of Determination On October 2, 2007 , Officer Morel issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action ( s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination ) .

On March 5, 2008, respondent issued to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy (the notice of determination) .

§6320` (the lien notice), advising petitioner that a notice of Federal tax lien had been filed with respect to the section 6700 penalty and that petitioner had the right to a hearing to appeal this collection action andt o discuss payment method options . On July 11, 2007, petitioner filed Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing, r

Section 6330(a) provides that no levy may be made: .on any property or right to property of any person unless the Secretary has notified,such person in writing of the right-to a hearing.

On May 25, 2007, respondent sent petitioner a Letter 3.172, Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320 (notice of Federal tax lien), with respect to petitioner's unpaid tax liabilities for all the years at issue .

On July 16, 2007, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for each of petitioners' 1996 tax year and-Mr- Lance's 1999 and 2001'tax-years .

The NFTL indicated that petitioner owed $2,656 .87, $7,998 .88, and -5- $7,484 .19 for his 1990, 1991, and 1992 tax years, respectively .' Petitioner made a timely request for a section 6320 hearing on February 7, 2006, in which he stated that the lien was improper because : (1) Taxes were not assessed in 1997 ; (2) the notices of deficiency were-mailed to the wrong address, if at all ; (3) petitioner did not receive the notices of deficiency; (4) the amount of the alleged assessment was signifi

y f Discussion Section 6320 (a) requires the Secretary to notify th e taxpayer ' administrative hearing on the matter..

On September 21, 2006, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioner sustaining the proposed collection action .

On March 12, 2007, respondent's Office of Appeals sent petitioner a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice o f determination) in respect of petitioner's liabilities for .2002 6 and 2003 .

as part of a collection due,.process,hearing,under section 6320 or 6330 .

SERVED SEP 15 2009 2 - The petition was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

Court on a petition filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

The instant case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6.330 .

On August 20, 2007, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

On August 23, 2007, respondent mailed to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Unde r SERVED Aug 03 2009 Section 6320 and/or 63301 (notice of determination) regarding petitioners' 2001 income tax liability .

Concerning Collection Action(s) .Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice.

In a May 7, 2008, Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, respondent determined that it was appropriate to collect petitioner's unpaid income tax liabilities and additions to tax (unpaid tax liabilities) for 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2002 by serving a notice of jeopardy levy .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge : This action was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of det rmination) with respec t to petitioners' 1996 Federal income tax liability .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge : This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to petitioner's Federal income tax liabilities for 1993, 1994., 1995, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 .

Banks a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) U} nde r Section 6320 and/or 6330, which sustained the filing of the notice of.

On April 20, 2007, respondent sent petitioner three separate Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 regarding liens and proposed levies for 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 .

“Nondeficiency” because the IRS accepted the return computing the unpaid tax as filed and asserted no deficiency, and “stand-alone” because the claim for innocent-spouse relief was made under section 6015 and not as part of a deficiency action or as part of a collection due process hearing under section 6320 or 6330.

On January 9, 2007, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 2000 through 2002 .

On January 11, 2006, respondent's Appeals office issued to petitioner : (1) A Decision Letter Conce ning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 concerning a proposed levy with respect to petitioner's 1999, 2000, and 001 tax years (decision letter) ; (2) a Notice of Determination C ncerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 as to a notice of Federal tax lien for the 1999, 2000, and 2001 tax years ; and (3) a Notice of Determination Concerning Col e

On April 5, 2007, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioner's taxable years 2000, 2001, and 2002 .

On November 14, 2007, the Appeals officer's summary and recommendation to sustain the proposed levy action was approved by the Appeals team manager, and the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 was sent to petitioner sustaining the proposed levy and returning the case to the Compliance Office for appropriate action .

This case was commenced in response to a'Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and 6330 (notice o f SERVED SEP - 9 2008 i determination).

Because we find that petitioner failed to timely request a collection hearing after respondent, on or about April 4, 2002, sent petitioner a section 6320 notice (section 6320 notice) of Federal tax lien (NFTL) filing under section 6323, we will grant respondent's motion as to the unpaid taxes assessed before that date .

SERVED JUL - 7 2008 - 2 - response to identical Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 issued separately to each petitioner .

' Having determined , again, that petitioner did not qualify for an OIC on ETA grounds , and having explained, again, the , reasoning behind the rejection , respondent issued petitioner a ,Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action ( s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 on December 23, 2005 .

Under what circumstances can a taxpayer receive more than one CDP hearing under section 6320 with respect to a tax period?

On July 22, 2005, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and section 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioner's taxable years 2000, 2001, and 2002 (notice of determination with respect to petitioner's taxable years 2000, 2001, and 2002) .

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: This action was commenced in response to a Notice ..of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 (Lien) of the .

9 - Office sent petitione a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) nder Section 6320 and/or .6330 (notice of determination) dated anuary 18,-2008 ., In.

On August 26, 2005, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Appeals Office conducted petitioners' section 6320 hearing by phone .

nt . On June 22, 2006, respondent issued petitioner; a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a. Hearing Under IRC 6320 (notice of Federal,tax-lien) for the years at issue . On July 6, 2006, petitioner requested an Appeals hearing under section 6320 . Petitioner indicated that she did not agree with the filing of the tax lien . Petitioner stated : "It is my belief that these amounts are unenforceable as the statute of .. limitations has run . I hereby request that all federal tax li

On April 20, 2006, respondent sustained the levy action in a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and 6330 .

Accordingly, on-April 12, 2007, petitioner was issued Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action,(s) under'Section 6320 and/or 6330 for his 2001, 2002, and 2003 tax years, from which petitioner petitioned this Court for review .

Also on June 1, 2006 , the IRS mailed a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, holding that the tax lien filed was an appropriate collection action.

In a .collection case under section 6320 or section 6330, a taxpayer is not permitted to challenge his underlying Federalincome tax"liability if he or she had,a prior opportunity to do so, Hoffman-v .

OPINION SWIFT, Judge : This matter is before us in this collection case under section 6320 on respondent's motion for summary judgment and on petitioners' cross-motion for partial summary judgment .

Petitioner submitted nothing beyond his initial hearing request, and.the officer issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), .sustaining the lien filing .

Bogardus , for respondent'F MEMORANDUM OPINION JACOBS, Judge :l The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collectio n Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330!(notice o f 'This case was submitted to Judge Jseph H .

$64 9 from business $3,700 Housing and utilities 600 Total 3,700 Transportation 300 Health care 200 Taxes (income and FICA) 155 Court ordered payments 200 Total 2,104 - 7 - On December 14, 2005, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1999, and 2000 sustaining the proposed levy.

MEMORANDUM OPINION WELLS, Judge: Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On May 31, 2006, respondent's Appeals Office issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collections Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy .

o. 13 UNITED STATES TAX COURT MARTIN DAVID HOYLE, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 7217-04L. Filed December 3, 2008. R sent P a notice of Federal tax lien, and P filed a request for an Appeals hearing pursuant to sec. 6320, I.R.C. Subsequently, R sent P a notice of determination upholding the Federal tax lien, and P petitioned this Court for review of R’s determination. P asserts that R failed to mail to P a notice of deficiency before assessing P’s 1993 tax

- 4 - By Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated May 22, 2007, respondent's Appeals Office sustained the issuance of the notice of intent to levy .

Section 6320(a)(3)(B) and (b),(1) provides that the notice shall inform such person of the right to request a hearing in the Commissioner's Appeals Office .

Respondent’s proposed decision document states: Pursuant to agreement of the parties in this case, it is ORDERED AND DECIDED: That the determinations set forth in the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 issued to petitioners on July 10, 2003, the Supplemental Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 issued to petitioners on June 25, 2005, the Second Supplemental Notice of Determination Concerning Col

SERVED MAY 21 2008 Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 2002 and 2003 .

Respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 dated June 17, 2005, which: (1) Verified that the requirements of all applicable laws and regulations had been met, (2) recited petitioner's unsuccessful challenge to the underlying tax liabilities, (3) determined that the proposed collection actions properly balanced the intrusion on petitioner against the need for efficie

o a Hearing, and petitioner timely requested a hearing under section 6330 . On May 12, 2005, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC 6320, and petitioner timely requested a hearing under section 6320 . Respondent offered petitioner a face-to-face hearing if petitioner identified any relevant issues regarding the proposed collection actions . Petitioner refused to raise any relevant 2We deny respondent's request for a penalty under se

On February 6, 2007, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or section 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioner's taxable years 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, and 2005 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION RUWE, Judge : The petition in this case was filed i n response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330', (notice o f determination) .1 This case is before the Court on respondent's 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued .

On :January 18, 2007, respondent's Appeals officer issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions,Under .Section 6320 and 6330 .

Respondent mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6330, dated July 12, 2006, advising that he intended to proceed with collection because petitioner was not entitled to contest the underlying tax liability in the context of a collection due process proceeding under section 6320 or 6330 .

On September 28, 2005, the hearing fficer to whom petitioner's case was assigned conducted a telephone section 6320 hearing (hearing) with petitioner's repr sentative .3 During the hearing, the hearing officer informed pe itioner's representative that all procedural requirements had bee met in filing the Federal tax lien .4 Petitioner's represe tative did not raise any spousal defenses or offer any collection alternatives to respondent except the po

MEMORANDUM OPINION SWIFT, Ju : Under section 6320, petitioner challenges respondent's notice of determination rejecting petitioner's $2,400 offer-in-compromise (OIC) and sustaining respondent's notice of Federal tax lien relating to petitioner's outstandin g SERVED MAR 10 2008 - 2 - Federal income tax liabilities for 1996, 2000 , 2001, 2002, and 2003, representing a cumulative total

On April 23, 20 7, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determinat on concerning collection action(s.) under section 6320'and/6; 330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioner's taxa le year-1999 .

That document also con- tained the following "Summary of Determination" that pertained to 3Instead of using the section 6330 determination form let- ter, the Appeals Office is supposed to use a form letter entitled "Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code" (form decision letter) where the taxpayer did not timely request a hearing with that office under sec .

Stanley Sheldon Kradman and Laura COHEN, Judge : The petition in thi case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination C ncerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 633 (notice of determination) with respect to petition rs' income tax liability for 2003 and 2004 and a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or Secti n 6330 of the Internal 2008 SERVED MAY 15 - 2 - Revenue Code (decision letter) for petitioners' income tax liabilities for 1994 through

note 2 . - 19 - Summary and Recommendation You submitted a Request for a Collection Due Process (CDP) Hearing Form 12153 following the receipt of Letter 3172, Notice of Federal Tax Lien and Your Right to a Hearing under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 6320 . Automated Collection (ACS) issued the notice dated 10/20/2005, allowing you until 11/21/2005 to submit a request for a hearing with Appeals . ACS received Form 12153 on 11/18/2005 . The CDP request was, therefore, timely as it was made

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge : This action was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioners' 1992, 1993, and 1994 Federal income tax liabilities .

Cavazos a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the levy action as the least intrusive collection alternative .

On May 29, 2007, respondent issued to petitioner, with a copy to petitioner's authorized representative, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), sustaining the proposed levy action against petitioner .

Section 6320 further provides that the taxpayer may request an Appeals hearing within 30 days beginning on the day after the 5-day period described above .

Subsequently, Appeals issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to petitioner's 2002 and 2003 taxable years (notice of determination) .

9 - received any other notice that might confer jurisdiction on this Court, such as a notice pertaining to a lien under section 6321 or to a levy under section 6331 (both of which are procedures applicable to "any person liable to pay any tax" (emphasis added)) .' Such collection activities give rise to a notice and opportunity for a hearing under section 6320 or section 6330 (both of which explicitly presume "unpaid tax") .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINIO N SWIFT, Judge : In this section 6320 lien case, petitioner seeks reversal of respondent's determination that petitioner is liable as a "responsible officer" under section 6672 for trust fund employment taxes (trust fund taxes) relating to periods ending December 31, 2001 through 2003 (the relevant periods) .

Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy . Petitioners timely petitioned the Court in response to the notice of determination . Thereafter, respondent filed the pending motion for summary judgment, to which petitioners responded . Subsequently, the parties were allowed to submit additional memoranda of law in

§ 6320 (the lien notice), advising petitioner that a notice of Federal tax lien had been filed with respect to the section 6700 penalty and that petitioner had the right to a hearing to appeal this collection action and to discuss payment method options . On July 11, 2007, petitioner filed Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing, r

ion of the deficiency. Respondent also issued a notice of Federal tax lien dated May 3, 2003, with regard to petitioners’ unpaid tax liability for 1996. Petitioners requested and received an administrative hearing with regard to the lien pursuant to sec. 6320. On Mar. 3, 2004, respondent issued to petitioners a notice of determination sustaining the filing of the lien for 1996 but noting that the lien had been released because petitioners had fully paid their tax liability for 1996. Petitioners

- 3 - respondent's Appeals Office in Seattle, Washington, sent petitioner a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

Respondent's determination was contained in a Notice of Determination Concerning, Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 issued after' petitioner requested a hearing concerning the proposed levy .

On February 15, 2007, the Appeals officer issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action ( s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy .

On November 3, 2006, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioners sustaining the proposed collection action and rejecting the 2005 compromise .

On July 14, 2005, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 finding that default of the OIC was procedurally and legally, correct, and that it was proper to proceed with the levy .

The motion arises in the context of a petition filed in response to a Notice o f I SERVED MAR 31 2008 46 - 2 - Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice) that respondent sent to petitioner .

Finally, the taxpayer may not raise an issue that was raised and considered at a previous CDP hearing under section 6320 or in any other previous administrative or judicial proceeding if he taxpayer participated meaningfully in such hearing or proceed- ing .

On November 8, 2005, the Appeals officer issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, in which the Appeals officer sustained the proposed collection action for 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993 .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACTJEAND OPINION GOEKE, Judge : These consolidated c ses arise from petitions for judicial review of two notices of de ermination concerning "SERVED FEB 2 5 2008 - 2 - collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 .1 In response to a notice of intent to levy issued by respondent with respect to outstanding income tax liabilities, petitioners Claude and Dana Salazar (Mr.

Russo's recommendation, issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination), determining the proposed levy regarding petitioner's tax liability for the years in issue to be appropriate .

On June 15, 2007, respondent filed a motion to di miss for lack of jurisdiction on the grounds that no notice of etermination unde r SERVED MAR 2 5 2008 2 - section 6320 or section 63301 was sent to petitioner for the tax years 1993, 1994, and 1995 that would confer jurisdiction on this Court .

On June 2, 2004, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 informing petitioner that respondent intended to proceed with the proposed levy.

On January 29, 2004, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under - 5 - Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

Such collection activities give rise to a notice and opportunity for a hearing under section 6320 or section 6330 (both of which explicitly presume “unpaid tax”).

SERVED AUG 2 3 2007 - 2 - In a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated March 21, 2006, respondent concluded that it was appropriate to collect by levy petitioner's outstanding 1995 Federal income tax liability .

Background This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the filing of a Notice of Federal Tax Lien in order to collect petitioner's unpaid Federal income taxes for 1999 and 2000 .

746, grants this Court jurisdiction to review the Commissioner's determination as to the propriety of filing a notice of Federal tax lien under section 6320 or a proposed levy on property under section 6330 .

- 2 - This matter arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 issued for unpaid Federal income tax for taxable years 1993 and 1994.1 The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioners may contest the liabilities respondent assessed for the taxable years 1993 and 1994, (2) whether respondent properly abated interest and adjusted accuracy-related penalties assessed against petitioners

The motion arises in the context of a petition filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 that respondent sent to petitioner .

In response, the IRS sent petitioners a Letter 3193, Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 (notice of determination), on March 28, 2006 .

Respondent issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining a levy on petitioner's property to collect unpaid taxes for taxable years 2000, 2001, and 2002 .

On August 3, 2006, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioner regarding his 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002 tax years .

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of Determination).

This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 sent to petitioner.

MEMORANDUM OPINION HAINES, Judge : Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1996 through 2002 (years at issue) .' Pursuant 'Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued.

- 5 - Ultimately, on October 4, 2006, respondent's Appeals Office sent to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

Respondent thereupon sent petitioner a "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330", with a Letter 3193 attached, dated October 15, 2004.

In his motion, respondent moves to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction principally on the ground that "no Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions Under Section 6320 and/or Section 6330, as authorized by I .R.C .

OPINION RUWE, Judge : This case is before the Court for judicial review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination letter) .

This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of Determination) sent to petitioner .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION DEAN, Special Trial Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of Determination) .

In a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated May 23, 2005, respondent determined to proceed with the collection by levy of petitioner's 1999 Federal income tax liability .

MEMORANDUM OPINION CARLUZZO, Special Trial Judge : In a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330,1 dated August 15, 2005, respondent concluded that it wa s 1 Unless otherwise indicated, subsequent section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, in effect for the relevant period .

SERVED EEB - 5 2UO7 - 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999 .

Determinations On December 2, 2004, Appeals issued to each petitioner a "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330" (notice) .

On June 28, 2001, respondent mailed to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

SEWED MAR 2 1 2007 - 2 - Petitioner Steven Rudolph Kaldi filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 2002 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION CARLUZZO, Special Trial Judge: In a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330,1 dated January 5, 2005, respondent determined that the Notice of 1 Section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, in effect for the relevant period.

This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

9654-02L, in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 dated May 10, 2002, for 1995, 1996, and 1997 .

OPINION RUWE, Judge : Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioners filed a petition for review of respondent's Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .1 Petitioners request that this case be conducted under section 7463(f)(2), which provides for what are commonly referred to as "small tax case" or "S case " procedures where a taxpayer is challenging a collection determination in which the unpaid tax does not exceed $50,000 .2

On March 3, 2006, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

On Dec mber 2, 2005, the Appeals Office issued to petition- ers a notic f determination concerning collection action(s ) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) issued to petitioner in June 2005 and supplemented in October 2006 .

On August 3, 2005, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

3 In May 2006, the Appeals Office issued a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code (decision letter) to petitioner, stating that the levy was appropriate and that petitioner did not have the right to appeal the decision because, not having filed a timely hearing request, he had been granted only an equivalent hearing .

- 6 - Respondent granted petitioners a section 6320 Appeals Office hearing relating to the NFTL .

SERVE) APR 2 62/I 1 - 2 - Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1990, 1997, 1999 (years at issue) .1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks review of respondent's determination .

The Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for taxable years 1996 and 1997 was mailed to petitioner on March 10, 2005 .1 The notice of determination was addressed to "Fred Sebastian, 864 Broadmoor, Chaparral, NM 41011" .

- 6 - On July 12, 2005, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding petitioner's 1999, 2000, and 2003 tax years .

SE6YE0 JAN - 3 2001 ~'~ - 2 - This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner on December 22, 2005 .

Gazi's estate a notice of determination con erning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notic of determina- tion) with respect to the notice of intent to 1 vy .

rt with respect to these notices . Respondent assessed the deficiencies and sent petitioner notices of tax due and demand letters . On August 4, 2004, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing under section 6320 . On September 7, 2004, respondent received petitioner's Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing . In this request, petitioner stated that he "would need to see." certain documents "before I am persuaded that I am legall

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge : This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining a proposed levy to collect petitioner' s Federal income taxes for 1999, 2000 , and 2001 .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of - 2 - determination) for 1982 through 1988, 1993, and 1997.1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks review of respondent’s determination.

Petitioner did not timely request a hearing under section 6320 in response to respondent ' s notice of lien filing .

On November 23, 2004, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1987, 1990, 1991, 1997, 1998, 2000, and 2001 (the determination).

By Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice), dated September 7, 2005, the Appeals Office sustained the proposed levy .

Determinations On January 14, 2005, Appeals issued a "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action ( s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 " (notice ) with respect to each of the Forms 12153 .

4 - By Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, Appeals determined that the proposed collection action (levy) for 1999 should proceed .

MEMORANDUM OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge : This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .1 The issues for decision are : (1 ) 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure .

On October 28, 2005, the Appeals Office issued to each petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination under sections 6320 and 6330) with respect to petitioners' taxable year 1988 .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioners filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions Under Section 6320 (notice of determination) for 1981 through 1986.1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioners seek 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued...) - 2 - review of respondent’s determination.

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 regarding his 1989, 1990, and 1998 tax years .

On December 16, 2005, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge : Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .' Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seek s ' Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued.

On April 12, 2006, Officer Heidle sent petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

SERVED APR 17 20W MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge : This case is before the Court on a petition for judicial review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .1 The issue for decision is whether respondent abused his discretion in sustaining the proposed levy action for the Estate of Melvine B .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge : Petitioners filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, an d SERVED JUN 21 2007 - 2 - 2002 (years at issue) .' Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioners seek review of respondent's determination .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued...) - 2 - review of respondent’s determination.

On November 18, 2005, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

On December 6, 2005, the Appeals office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning the collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

- 3 - On October 13, 2006, respondent's Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy and lien filing .

In the instant case, the record indicates that the only issues petitioner raised throughout the section 6320 administrative process and in his petition to this Court were frivolous and/or tax protester type arguments .

MEMORANDUM OPINION JACOBS, Judge :' The petitions in these consolidated cases were each filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 633 0 'These cases were assigned to Judge Julian I .

On October 19, 2005, the Appeals office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioner's outstanding tax liabilities for the years in issue .

SERViD APR 3 0 2007 2 Respondent's motion to dismiss is based on the contentio n that petitioner's request for a section 6320 Appeals Office hearing was untimely .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioners filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1981 through 1988.1 Pursuant to section 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued...) - 2 - 6330(d), petitioners seek review of respondent’s determination.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge : This action was commenced in response to Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

As discussed below, the notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) addresses only the notice of tax lien and makes no determination with respect to the notice of intent to levy issued with respect to petitioner’s taxable year 2001.

- 5 - On March 15, 2006, the Appeals office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

On July 13, 2005, after reviewing the correspondence and documents that petitioner submitted, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

§ 6320 (notice of Federal tax lien) . On January 18 and February 23, 2005, respectively, respondent received two Forms 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing, in response to the notice of intent to levy and the notice of Federal tax lien . In the Forms 12153, petitioner argued that respondent violated petitioner's due process rights by

On June 28, 2006, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge : This case is before the Court on a petition for judicial review of a Notice of Determination Concerning SERVRD .OCT 1 1 2007 - 2 - Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .' The issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with collection by levy of petitioner's 2000 corporate income tax .

- 3 - On October 13, 2006, respondent's Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy and lien filing .

In due course, R issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 regarding that action.

On April 20, 2006, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), sustaining the proposed levy action .

As discussed below, the notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) addresses only the notice of tax lien and makes no determination with respect to the respective notices of intent to levy issued with respect to petitioner's taxable years 2000 and 2001 and 2002 .

On September 25, 2006, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action ( s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining respondent ' s proposed collection action .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice o f determination) .

Deese a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC Section 6320 with respect to taxable years 1991, 1993, and 1994 .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge : Petitioners filed a petition with this .Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1999 .1 Pursuant to section 6330(d) , 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued.

MEMORANDUM OPINION JACOBS, Judge : This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .' The issue for decision is whether respondent abused his discretion in 'Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code) as amended, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure .

On July 18, 2006, respondent issued petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION HAINES, Judge : Petitioners filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 2001 and 2002 (years at issue) .' Pursuant to 'Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued .

On November 28, 2005, the Appeals officer issued to peti- tioners a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

Settlement Officer Chadwell determined to proceed with the proposed levy, and respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 on July 29, 2005 .

Regs ., instead of a regular section 6330 hearing, and on September 1, 2005, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code (decision letter) .

- 3 - Under Section 6320 and/or 6330" .

MEMORANDUM OPINION GOEKE, Judge : This case is before the Court for review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .' Respondent 'Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and all Rule references (continued .

As grounds for his motion, respondent stated that no notice of determination under section 6320 or 6330 was sent to petitioner and that responden t 1 The envelope containing the imperfect petition bears a postmark of Nov .

MEMORANDUM OPINION GERBER, Judge : In a January 11, 2005, Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330) (Notice) respondent notified petitioner that the filing of the Notices of Federal Tax Lien (NFTLs) with the Panola County Chancery Clerk's Office in Batesville, Mississippi, for petitioner's 1991 tax liability was sustained .

On February 23, 2005, respondent issued to petitioner two Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices of determination) regarding petitioner's outstanding 1993, 1994, 1995, and 2002 tax liabilities .4 In the notices of determination, respondent sustained the filing of the lien .

Determinations On January 14, 2005, Appeals issued a "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action ( s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 " (notice ) with respect to each of the Forms 12153 .

On April 15, 2005, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 relating to 1989 and 1991 through 2000 .

- 2 - Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

JUL 1 7 2006 SERVED - 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 (Notice of Determination).

filed-in sresponse to a Notice of Determination Concerning dbl n Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner on October 27, 2004.

SERVED ';APR 1 9 2006,1 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

g and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC 6320 with regard to petitioner's unpaid taxes for the years in dispute . On March 25, 2003, petitioner submitted to respondent's Office of Appeals (Appeals Office) a request for an administrative hearing under section 6320 . The Appeals Office determined that petitioner's request for an administrative hearing was not timely and conducted a so- called equivalent hearing. Sec . 301.6320-1(i), Proced . & Admin . Regs . On August 4, 2005, respondent mailed to

- 2 - This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner on December 30, 2003.

We have also held, though, that the Commissioner has no power to waive or extend section 6320 and section 6330's time limits for requesting a CDP hearing.

- 2 - proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Determination Letter Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 2 - This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner on October 31, 2003.

SERVED MAY 2 5 2006 - 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

As a result, on June 9, 2003, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (2003 notice of determination) .

2 2006` - 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

l 5, 2004, the Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination, which states that it relates to petitioner’s 1997 - 3 - tax year.2 On the same date, the Appeals Office also issued to petitioner a “Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code” (the decision letter), which states that it relates to petitioner’s 1991 tax year but is otherwise essentially identical to the Notice of Determination.3 The Notice of Determination and the decisi

On April 12, 2005, respondent sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

EU NOV 14 2011 cev - 2 - Background On May 3, 2005, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) regarding her unpaid Federal income tax for 1997 .1 Respondent's Office of Appeals determined that it was appropriate to collect petitioner's unpaid taxes by levy .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioners filed a petition with this Court in response to Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 2000.

OPINION WHERRY, Judge: These consolidated cases arise from petitions for judicial review filed in response to Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with collection of income tax liabilities for years 2000, 2001, and 2002.

On June 4, 2002, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

] On April 26, 2005, respondent's Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determina- tion) .

SERVED JAR 1 4 2006 - 2 - Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for unpaid Federal income tax for the taxable year 1995 .

Background On May 10, 2005, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

On September 16, 2003, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioner.

The motion arises in the context of a petition filed in response to a Notice of Determination - 2 - Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 that respondent sent to petitioners.

- 3 - OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 2000 and 2001 (years at issue).

On March 2, 2005, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) .

On January 4, 2005, respondent rejected petitioners' offer- in-compromise and issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining the proposed levy action with respect to petitioners' 1997, 1998, and 1999 income tax liabilities .' On 6Attached to the notice of determination in the record are two rejection letters from respondent .

On May 8, 2002, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination) was issued to petitioners.

Petitioner seeks a review under section 6320 to the issuance by respondent of notices of Federal tax lien for unpaid Federal income taxes 'Unless otherwise indicated, subsequent section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as amended .

When the petition was filed, petitioner resided in Fairfield, Iowa .' Background On December 3, 2004, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) regarding her unpaid Federal income taxes for 1999 and 2000 .2 Respondent's Office of Appeals determined that it was appropriate to collect petitioner's unpaid taxes by levy unless petitioner exercised her right to judicial review .

MEMORANDUM OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320¹ and/or 6330.

On August 6, 2001, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection actions under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determir.ation).

The dismissal of a proceeding brought in this Court under section 6320 or 6330 due to the offset of an overpayment may convince taxpayers that their efforts during the administrative and judicial process were wasted.

Petitioners seek a review under section 6320 of respondent’s decision to 1Unless otherwise indicated, subsequent section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year at issue.

The regulation dictates the result: Where the taxpayer previously received a CDP Notice under section 6320 [i.e., a NFTL] with respect to the same tax and tax period and did not request a CDP hearing with respect to that earlier CDP Notice, the taxpayer already had an opportunity to dispute the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability.

24U6 SEWED NOV 16 - 2 - Background On October 5, 2005, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) regarding her unpaid Federal income taxes for 2001 and 2002 .1 Respondent's Office of Appeals determined that it was appropriate to collect petitioner's unpaid taxes by levy .

sEgyEn DEC 2 8 2006 - 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for judicial review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge : This case is before the Court on a petition for judicial review of a Notice of Determination Concerning : YEQ OCT 3 0 2006 - 2 - Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 (Lien) of the Internal Revenue Code .' The issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with collection, in the form of a filed tax lien, of petitioner's Federal income tax liabilities for the 1990, 1993, 1994, 2000, and 2001 taxable years .

On September 23, 2003, a Letter 3193, Notibe of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Qnder Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) was issued to petitioner.

On February 5, 2002, Appeals issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioner, in which it was determined that the levy·should proceed because petitioner had failed to attend the scheduled conference or otherwise respond to contacts by the Appeals officer.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioner filed the petition in this case in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1999 and 2000 (years in issue) .1 Pursuant to 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (continued .

The petition in this case was filed under section 6330(d)1 in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) relating to a Federal tax lien filed for the taxable year 1999.

Bethea considered the documents petitioner sent during the section 6330 administrative process, concluded that petitioner's contentions were frivolous and that petitioner did not offer any collection alternatives, and on December 22, 2005, sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy to collect petitioner's 1998 tax liabilities .

On November 19, 2003, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy to collect petitioner's unpaid tax liabilities for the years in·issue.

On June 4, 2004, respondent mailed to petitioner at the above address of petitioner a notice of Federal tax lien filing and right to a hearing under section 6320 (Lien Notice), which lien related to the above jeopardy assessments and which notice explained petitioner's right to a section 6320 hearing with regard to the filed Federal tax lien .

On July 22, 2004, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his 2000 tax year.1 In the notice of determination, respondent determined that the proposed collection action was appropriate and to proceed with collection.

On February 25, 2005, respondent's Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy .

Petitioner filed the amended petition on August 4, 2005, based upon notices of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 .

, initially reported a tax liability of zero, but in 2003, filed an amended return where he reported, but did not pay, additional tax. On December 18, 2003, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Federal Tax Lien and Your Right to a Hearing under I.R.C. § 6320 (notice of Federal tax lien) relating to the years in issue. On January 26, 2004, respondent received petitioner’s Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing. On October 5, 2004, respondent conducted a face-to-face hearing

On January 21, 2005, respondent's Appeals Office mailed to petitioner a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the filing of the levy notice against petitioner .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION CHIECHI, Judoe: This case arises from a petiti·on filed in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320¹ and/or 6330 (notice of determina- tion).

Summers furth r stated that he would not provide the Form 433-A and petitione s' 2003 and 2004 tax returns until the above issues were addresse On June 2005, respondent's Appeals office sent petitioners Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Und r Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy because etitioners did not provide the Form 433-A, did not provide 2003 d 2004 tax returns, and did not raise legitimate collection al ernatives .

On July 5, 1999, respondent sent to petitioner a Letter 3172, Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Right to a Hearing Under IRC Section 6320, regarding petitioner’s 1989, 1990, 1991, and 1992 tax years.

Respondent's Notice of Determination On December 16, 2004, respondent sent to petitioner a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for the taxable year 2001 determining that the proposed levy action was appropriate .

At trial, petitioner reiterated the issues presented during the section 6320 hearing.

MEMORANDUM OPINION NIMS, Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), in which respondent determined to proceed wit h SERVED FEB 9 2006 -2- collection by levy of petitioner's Federal income tax liability for 1988 to 1992, inclusive, plus accrued interest and failure to pay penalty under section 6651(a)(3) .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge : Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1989 and 1991 .

SERVED NOV 1 420 tZ( - 2 - Background On July 8, 2005, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) regarding her unpaid Federal income tax for 2000 .1 Respondent's Office of Appeals determined that the issuance of a Notice of Intent to Levy was appropriate .

On October 24, 2003, petitioner timely requested a section 6320 collection due process (CDP) hearing with respondent's Appeals Office for the purpose of securing the release of respondent's filed tax lien against petitioner .

gggNED MP 1 1 2006 - 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on a petition for judicial review of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Background On September 16, 2005, respondent issued to petitioner'a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) regarding his unpaid Federal tax liabilities for 1999 and 2001 .1 Respondent's Office of Appeals determined that it was appropriate to collect petitioner's unpaid taxes by levy.

The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: Petitioner filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1991, 1992, and - 2 - 1993.1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks review of respondent’s determination.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge : Petitioners filed a petition with this Court in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice o f SERVED OCT 2 6 2006 - 2 - determination) for 1987 through 1990 .1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioners seek review of respondent's determination .

SERVED NOV 2 8 2006 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge : The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 .1 The matter is presently before the Court on respondent's motion for imposition of a penalty under section 6673 .

MEMORANDUM OPINION GALE, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 Respondent has moved 1 Unless otherwise noted, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code applicable to the periods at issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

On January 26, 2005, respondent's Appeals Office issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy .

On October 4, 2005, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, which sustained the proposed levy action .

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 6 - Respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination notice) dated August 28, 2003.

On June 5, 2003, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) which stated that respondent intended to proceed with the proposed levy.

On June 3, 2004, respondent’s Appeals Office sent to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

- 2 - Respondent issued each petitioner a separate Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for unpaid Federal income taxes and related liabilities for 1991, 1992, 1993, and 1998.

MEMORANDUM OPINION WELLS, Judge: Respondent issued petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 In response to that notice, petitioners timely filed a petition for lien or levy 1Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.

- 2 - This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner.

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

- 2 - This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner.

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 2 - Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for unpaid Federal income tax and related liabilities for 1996 and 1997.2 The notice of determination asserts that the unpaid balance is $4,249.07.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COLVIN, Judge: On August 6, 2004, respondent sent petitioner a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 in which respondent determined that a notice of Federal tax lien regarding petitioner’s income taxes for 1995-96 would not be withdrawn.

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice).

After reviewing all information that was submitted by petitioner, on February 9, 2004, the Appeals officer issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 that stated that the Internal Revenue Service has complied with Code and procedural requirements, that no relief would be granted, and the proposed levy was sustained.

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

By Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated May 29, 2003 (the notice of determination), Ms.

Collection Due Process Hearing On May 3, 2002, petitioner timely requested a hearing under section 6320 (collection due process hearing).

Discussion Section 6330(a) provides that no levy may be made on any property or right to property of any person unless the Secretary has notified such person in writing of the right to a hearing before the levy is made.

- 2 - Respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), in which respondent sustained a proposed levy to collect petitioner’s unpaid 1998 tax liability following an administrative hearing.

On June 17, 2004, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed lien.

On January 29, 2003, Appeals sent Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioners’ counsel (the notices of determination).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, and all section (continued...) - 2 - review of respondent’s determination.

- 2 - This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner.

On November 26, 2001, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 was sent to petitioner.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The issues for decision are: (1) Whether respondent may proceed with collection action as so determined, and (2) whether the Court, sua sponte, should impose a penalty under section 6673.

P filed with the Court a Petition for Lien or Levy Action Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On May 29, 2003, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, with respect to petitioner's unpaid liabilities for 1991, 1992, 1993, and 1994.

On April 29, 2004, respondent issued to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for unpaid 1999 Federal income tax and related liabilities.

MEMORANDUM OPINION WHALEN, Judge: Respondent issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) sustaining a levy on petitioner’s property to collect unpaid taxes for taxable years 2000 and 2001.

On April 11, 2002, respondent issued to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining respondent’s proposed levy.

Respondent issued petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On April 16, 2003, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 3The transcript stated that the balance due was $6,012,633.33.

Burke, on September 20, 2004, respondent issued the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

- 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The issues for decision are: (1) Whether an oral motion by petitioner to dismiss should be granted, and if not, (2) whether respondent may proceed with collection action as so determined, and (3) whether the Court, sua sponte, should impose a penalty under section 6673.

On April 8, 2004, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

An attachment to the notice of determination stated in pertinent part: Summary and Recommendation Collection Due Process--Lien You submitted a timely Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing under Internal Revenue Code Section 6320 in response to a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing against a 1040 (Individual Income tax) liability for the year ending 12/31/96.

On January 29, 2004, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under.Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy action.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: Petitioners filed a petition in response to respondent’s Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of - 2 - Determination).1 Petitioners allege that they have insufficient assets to pay their income tax liability for the year 2000.

On October 22, 2004, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) in which the Appeals Office sustained the issuance of the notice of intent to levy.

On September 29, 2004, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy.

- 2 - Held, further, R may proceed with collection of balances due as determined in a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

respondent' s Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of Determination).¹ The sole issue for decision is whether ¹ Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as amended, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to the Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 (notices of determination) for 1996, 1997, and 1998.1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks 1 Unless otherwise noted, all section references are to the (continued...) - 2 - review of respondent’s determination sustaining a Federal tax lien.

Respondent also mailed to petitioners Notices of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320 for 1996-2001 and Notices of Intent to Levy and Notice Of Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6330 for 1999-2001.

On April 14, 2004, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, sustaining the proposed levy.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The issues for decision are: (1) Whether respondent may proceed with collection action as so determined, and (2) whether the Court, sua sponte, should impose a penalty under section 6673.

On April 8, 2003, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining that the proposed levy action was appropriate.

Held, further, R’s motion for summary judgment is granted, and R may proceed with collection of balances due as determined in a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On March 25, 2003, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 (notice of determination) in which that office sustained the notice of tax lien.

The Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the Notice of Determination), dated October 29, 2003, sustaining the proposed levy and denying petitioners’ request for an installment agreement.4 The Notice of Determination refers to 4 The Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of Determination) states as its “Summa

O’Shea’s determination by a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 dated October 2, 2003.

Regs.] - 13 - This Court has cited the above regulatory provisions, and corresponding promulgations under section 6320, with approval.

On November 17, 2004, respondent issued to petitioner a - 3 - Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: Petitioner invoked the Court's jurisdiction under section 6330 in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 regarding his unpaid Federal income taxes for 1983 and 1993 to 1995.1 Respondent's Office of Appeals (Appeals Office) had determined that it was appropriate to collect petitioner's unpaid taxes pursuant to a proposed levy.

SERVED NOV 1 0 2005 - 2 - SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case was initially filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to petitioner's 1985 and 1999 taxable years.1 In a previous opinion, Newstat v.

MEMORANDUM OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: Petitioner filed a petition in response to respondent’s Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1995.1 The issues for decision are whether 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue.

- 9 - Notice of Determination and Tax Court Petition On March 10, 2004, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for tax years 1995, 1996, and 1999.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: The petition and amended petition in this case were filed in response to Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices of determination) sent separately to Patricia A.

On February 4, 2004, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (final notice) determining that the - 4 - proposed levy should be sustained.

Regs.] This Court has cited the above regulatory provisions, and corresponding promulgations under section 6320, with approval.

On July 16, 2003, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining that the proposed levy action was appropriate.

In the June 4, 2004, Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 2000 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner, the Appeals officer determined: - 6 - During Appeals consideration of your case, you did not raise any non-frivolous collection alternatives or any non-frivolous issues.

MEMORANDUM OPINION WELLS, Judge: Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On February 9, 2004, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

SERVED DEC 2 0 2005 - 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.¹ The issues for decision are: (1) Whether respondent may proceed with collection action as so determined, and (2) whether the Court, sua sponte, should impose a penalty under section 6673.

On December 16, 2003, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On January 21, 2004, respondent’s Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining that a proposed levy to recover a section 6672 trust fund penalty liability with respect to petitioner’s 1997 tax year was appropriate.2 The first page of the notice of determination stated: If you want to dispute this determination in court, you must file a petition with the United States Tax Court for a redet

On November 4, 2003, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

SERVED APR 6 2005 - 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on respondent's motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 121.¹ 2 The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On July 12, 2004, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his 1998, 1999, and 2000 tax years (notice of determination).

On December 31, 2003, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with regard to 1999.

Respondent also mailed to petitioners Notices of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320 for 1996-2001 and Notices of Intent to Levy and Notice Of Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6330 for 1999-2001.

In any event, on August 29, 2003, the Commissioner issued Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (referred to herein as notice of determination), which contemplates permitting the collection action to proceed.

On June 4, 2002, respondent issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed collection action.

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On August 20, 2003, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

We have previously construed section 6330(d)(1) as granting us jurisdiction over a lien case brought under section 6320 when it involves a type of tax that we normally consider in a deficiency case, even if the lien case does not involve a deficiency in that type of tax.

In the January 8, 2002, Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1998 (notice of determination) sent to petitioner, the Appeals officer determined that “all of the legal and procedural requirements for taking levy action have been met”, and collection could proceed.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on respondent’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 121.1 The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On October 28,-:2002, petitioriers filed with the Court a Petition for Irien or Levy Action Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.2 The so Le issue raised in the petitiön is a challenge to the amount of petitioners' sunderlying tax liability for 2000.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION GERBER, Judge: This matter arises, under section 6320,1 out of respondent’s filing of a Notice of Federal Tax Lien with respect to petitioner’s 1993 and 1994 income tax liabilities.

On April 14, 2003, the Appeals officer issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), in which he sustained the proposed levy to collect petitioner’s 1997 tax liability.

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

OPINION WELLS, Judge: The petition in the instant case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 In the notice of determination, respondent determined that collection should proceed against petitioners to 1All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Petitioners were notified of the filing of the Federal tax lien as required under section 6320, but they did not request that a hearing be held with respect to the filing of that lien.

Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.

The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 and a Notice of Determination Concerning Your Request for Relief from Joint and Several Liability Under Section 6015.

Respondent thereafter denied relief and issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 on October 15, 2002.

1. Respondent filed a Notice of Federal Tax Lien (NFTL) with respect to petitioner’s tax liabilities for 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, and 2001. Petitioner filed requests for an administrative hearing with respect to the filing of a Federal tax lien under section 6320. In addition, respondent issued to petitioner a Final Notice- -Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing with respect to her 2000 and 2001 tax liabilities. On September 19, 2002, pursuant to section 6330 petitioner f

This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sent to petitioners.

Orum) a Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (decision letter) for 1998 and a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1999.

- 2 - Respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for unpaid Federal income tax and related liabilities for 1997.2 The issue for decision is whether respondent abused his discretion in determining that certain asserted overpayments are not available as a collection alternative to offset petitioner’s unpaid Federal income tax and related liabilities for 1997.

§ 6320, relating to petitioner’s 1996, 1997, and 1999 income tax liabilities. On December 12, 2000, respondent sent petitioner a Final Notice, Notice of Intent to Levy, and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing, relating to petitioner’s 1996, 1997, and 1999 income tax liabilities. On or about December 29, 2000, in response to these notices, petitioner

10 SERVED .0CT 1 3 2004 MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on respondent's motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 121 and to impose a penalty under section 6673.¹ The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

ast known address was sufficient, notwithstanding the fact that P did not receive such notice. Held, further, the courtesy copy of the income tax notice of determination that R’s officer sent P in August 2003 was not a notice of determination under sec. 6320, I.R.C., or sec. 6330, I.R.C., nor did the sending of that copy serve to revive the statutory filing period. Held, further, because P did not timely file his petition in respect of the income tax notice of determination, this Court lacks jur

This proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sent to petitioner.

Respondent sent to petitioner’s last known address a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under Section 6320 (lien notice), dated March 4, 2003, advising petitioner that a notice of Federal tax lien had been filed with respect to her unpaid liabilities for taxable years 1993, 1994, and 2000, and that petitioner could receive a hearing with respondent’s Office of Appeals.

On July 9, 2003, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

The Appeals Office issued to petitioners a “Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330”, dated March 14, 2002.

- 2 - Background The petition in this case was timely filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with respect to the taxable years 1992 through 1997.

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: This proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

we shall grant respondent’s motion to dismiss. Background The record reflects and/or the parties do not dispute the following: On October 31, 2002, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under I.R.C. Section 6320 regarding petitioner’s Federal tax liabilities for the years 1995 through 1999. Petitioner timely filed Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing. On June 5, 2003, respondent held a telephone conference with petitio

- 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on respondent’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 121.1 The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On September 25, 2003, the Appeals Office issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioner.

On October 11, 2002, the Appeals Office sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On February 12, 2003, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 SERVED OCT 6 2004 - 3 - Petitioner resided in Torrance, California, when he filed the petition.

Extensive correspondence was exchanged between respondent and both petitioners, culminating in a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1987 and 1988 mailed on April 16, 2003.

On October 11, 2002, the Appeals Office sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

MEMORANDUM OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: Petitioners filed a petition in response to respondent’s Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notices of determination) for 1997 and 1999.1 Respondent filed a motion to 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as amended.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On March 14, 2002, respondent’s Appeals Office issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, determining that the proposed levy against him for 1997 should be sustained.

- 4 - On July 22, 2002, the Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION GERBER, Judge: Respondent, on March 14, 2002, issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), with regard to petitioner’s 1991 and 1996 taxable years, determining to proceed with enforced collection, including levy.

On October 8, 2003, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for the years in issue.

On October 23, 2002, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining the proposed levy.

Respondent subsequently issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated March 3, 2004, which sustained the proposed levy action.

On July 11, 2002, a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 was mailed to petitioner in which the Appeals officer recommended proceeding with the levy.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HAINES, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).1 After concessions, the issue for decision is 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.

987. - 3 - proceeding, the bankruptcy court discharged Carole’s 1987 tax liability. C. Notice of Federal Tax Lien On September 8, 2000, respondent mailed to petitioner and Carole a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under I.R.C. § 6320 regarding the 1987 tax liability. D. Appeals Office Hearings On September 25, 2000, petitioner and Carole timely filed a Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing. On January 25 and March 19, 2002, petitioner met with Appe

On July 31, 2003, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM OPINION PANUTHOS, Chief Special Trial Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 63301 (notice of determination).

Molina a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On April 17, 2002, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 determining to proceed with collection of petitioner’s 1993 and 1994 tax liabilities.

On March 5, 2002, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination) determining that the tax assessments made against petitioner were valid and appropriate, all requirements of various applicable law and administrative procedures were followed, and issuance of the notice of levy was appropriate given the facts and circumstances presented by petitioner.

On August 8, 2000, petitioners were sent a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for their 1989, 1990, 1992, 1993, and 1996 taxable years.

On August 11, 2003, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination).

On July 25, 2002, respondent mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination) sustaining the proposed collection action against petitioner for all years.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on respondent’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 121.1 The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On August 15, 2002, the IRS issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to proceed with collection.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with collection as so determined.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on respondent’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 121.1 The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

As a result, on September 14, 2001, respondent’s Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) in which the proposed levy was determined to be appropriate to collect petitioner’s unpaid tax for 1997.

section 6320, dated March 27, 2002, advising that a Notice of Federal Tax Lien had been filed on March 22, 2002. Prior to the filing of the notice, petitioners submitted several offers-in-compromise with respect to doubt as to collectibility of the outstanding assessments. The offers were rejected because it was determined - 3 - that petitioners w

- 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case is before the Court on respondent’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 121.1 The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.¹ The issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with collection as so determined.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION GOEKE, Judge: This case arises from respondent’s issuance of a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for petitioner’s taxable year 1997.

MEMORANDUM OPINION CARLUZZO, Special Trial Judge: In a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 dated January 10, 2003, respondent proposed to proceed with collection of petitioners’ unpaid 1994 Federal income tax.1 1 Section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at the time the petition was filed.

For purposes of section 6330(b)(3), an “impartial” officer is one “who has had no prior involvement with respect to the unpaid tax specified in subsection (a)(3)(A) before the first hearing under this section or section 6320.” See Perez v.

On February 28, 2002, the Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 in which it determined the following: 1.

On July 30, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On April 12, 2002, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of Determination) regarding petitioner’s 1989 Federal income tax liability.

- 2 - Respondent issued a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 to petitioner for unpaid Federal income taxes and related liabilities in the following amounts: Year Liability1 1991 $6,070.14 1992 2,360.67 1994 .28 1995 .54 1996 1,557.39 1 Amounts computed through May 31, 2002.

CHIECHI, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 63301 (notice of determina- tion).

Lah) (collectively, petitioners) a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).2 The issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with the proposed collection activities relating to 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993 (years in issue).

: (3) Impartial officer.--The hearing under this subsection shall be conducted by an officer or employee who has had no prior involvement with respect to the unpaid tax specified in subsection (a)(3)(A) before the first hearing under this section or section 6320. A taxpayer may waive the requirement of this paragraph. The operative terms of section 6330(b)(3) provide that “impartial” concerns the Appeals officer’s prior involvement with - 16 - respect to the unpaid tax before the hearing. See al

This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 2 - The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On July 13, 2001, respondent sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 in which respondent determined to proceed with collection from petitioner of his tax liabilities for 1994-96.

On February 5, 2002, respondent's Appeals Office (Appeals Office) mailed to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection actions(s) under section 6320 and/or 63302 (notice of determination).

On November 21, 2001, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to the unpaid liabilities for 1995, 1996, and 1997.

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: This case was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM OPINION HAINES, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

, but that year is not part of the present case. B. Notice of Federal Tax Lien On March 9, 2001, respondent sent to petitioner, by certified mail, a Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC 6320 (the notice required by section 6320). The notice required by section 6320 listed petitioner’s unpaid tax liabilities for 1996 and 1997. Three days later, on March 12, 2001, respondent filed a Notice of Federal Tax Lien with the Recorder of Mercer County in Celina, Ohio, wi

- 2 - Respondent issued petitioner a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for unpaid Federal income taxes and related liabilities in the following amounts: Year Liability2 1991 $4,599.06 1993 5,885.73 Petitioner seeks to have a tax lien removed.

- 2 - Background On July 13, 2001, respondent issued to petitioners separate Notices of Determination Concerning Collections Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to their unpaid taxes for 1996 and 1997.1 On August 8, 2001, respondent issued to petitioner Paul L.

Background On Friday, October 18, 2002, the Internal Revenue Service Appeals Office in Atlanta, Georgia, issued to petitioner a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 regarding petitioner’s Federal tax liabilities for 1988 and 1991.

Petitioner contends that the Court lacks jurisdiction over the petition on the ground the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated April 11, 2002, upon which this case is based, is invalid because it was not signed by the - 2 - Appeals officer who conducted the administrative hearing.1 As discussed in detail below, we shall deny petitioner’s Motion to Dismiss.

OPINION GOEKE, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination).

On May 6, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Lah) (collectively, petitioners) a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).2 The issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with the proposed collection activities relating to 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993 (years in issue).

Holguin a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

MEMORANDUM OPINION GOLDBERG, Special Trial Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The issue for decision is whether respondent may 1Unless otherwise indicated, section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.

- 2 - filed in response to: (1) Separate Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sent to petitioner Janie M.

On July 10, 2001, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for unpaid 1992 Federal income tax and related liabilities in the amount of $10,132.48.

On July 16, 2002, the Appeals Office issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to petitioner Albert Horton and a separate notice of determination to petitioner Ramona Osborne.

ach petitioner’s transferee liability, showing an $89,079.25 unpaid balance of assessment with respect to each petitioner. In separate letters dated May 16, 2001, respondent notified each petitioner of this action and of the right to a hearing under section 6320. E. Petitioners’ Requests for Hearings Each petitioner timely submitted a Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing. Attached to these Forms 12153 were substantially identical memoranda, asserting that each asserted tax li

On August 30, 2002, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On February 28, 2001, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioners regarding their 1995, 1996, and 1997 tax years (notice of determination).

The Notice of Determination On April 10, 2002, respondent sent each trust a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the determination letter), in which respondent stated that collection from each trust of its tax for tax years 1996-97 would proceed.

On December 5, 2000, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding his 1991 and 1992 tax years (notice of determination).

Respondent’s decision letter stated in - 4 - pertinent part: Your due process hearing request was not filed within the time prescribed under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION RUWE, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 2 - MEMORANDUM OPINION WHERRY, Judge: This case arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The issue for decision is whether respondent may proceed with collection of tax liabilities for years 1995 through 1999 as so determined.

Consequently, on April 12, 2002, respondent sent the Boyers a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Determination Notice).

On a date not disclosed by the record, but before respondent issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination), the Appeals officer provided petitioner with a certified transcript of his account with respect to each of his taxable years 1995 and 1999.

On January 25, 2001, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).7 An attach- ment to the notice of determination stated in pertinent part: MATTERS CONSIDERED AT APPEALS Applicable Law and Administrative Procedures Based on the information available, the requirements of applicable law and administrative procedures have been met.

On February 13, 2001, the Appeals Office issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to Mr.

On July 11, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to petitioner’s unpaid liability for 1998 (notice of determina- tion with respect to petitioner’s unpaid liability for 1998).3 An attachment to that notice stated in pertinent part: Verification of Legal and Procedural Requirements The Secretary has provided sufficient verification tha

On March 1, 2002, the Appeals office mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 concluding that respondent may proceed with collection of the remainder of petitioner’s 1994 tax liability.

On June 7, 2002, Appeals issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1997 and 1998 (notice of determination).

Lyman a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) with respect to the notice of intent to levy relating to taxable year 1998 and issued to Ms.

On November 1, 2001, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 which stated: A review of the case history indicates a valid assessment was made, notice and demand was provided and a neglect or refusal to pay occurred.

Section 6330(c)(4) provides in relevant part: - 9 - CERTAIN ISSUES PRECLUDED.–-An issue may not be raised at the hearing if-- (A) the issue was raised and considered at a previous hearing under section 6320 or in any other previous administrative or judicial proceeding; and (B) the person seeking to raise the issue participated meaningfully in such hearing or proceeding.

On April 30, 2002, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection - 5 - Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) regarding petitioner’s 1994 through 1997 tax liabilities.

Petitioner's Hearing and the Notice of Determination At the section 6320/6330 hearing on November 29, 2001, petitioner asserted that the chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge absolved her of the 1995 and 1996 income tax liabilities.

The Notice of Determination On April 10, 2002, respondent sent each trust a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the determination letter), in which respondent stated that collection from each trust of its tax for tax years 1996-97 would proceed.

Memo. 2002-255; Tapio v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-141. 12The Secretary or his delegate, including the Commissioner, is authorized by statute to issue a notice of Federal tax lien, a notice of Federal tax lien filing and right to a hearing under sec. 6320, and a notice of intent to levy and right to a hearing under sec. 6330. Secs. 6320(a), 6323(a), 6330(a), 6331(d), 7701(a)(11)(B) and (12)(A)(i); see also Wilson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-242; secs. 301.6320-1(a)(1), 301.6330-1(a)(1),

On March 8, 2002, respondent issued two Notice(s) of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 advising that respondent determined to proceed with collection.

On April 12, 2002, respondent sent petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (Notice of Determination) regarding petitioners’ 1994 and 1995 income tax liabilities.

Instead, on the basis of petitioner’s letters and attached documents, and because of a failure by petitioner to set a date or time for a hearing, Appeals issued to petitioner on July 16, 2002, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1994, 1995, and 1996.

On September 26, 2002, the Appeals Office issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to Mr.

On March 19, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

The instant proceeding arises from a petition for judicial review filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions(s) Under - 2 - Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 The issues for decision are: (1) Whether respondent may proceed with collection action as so determined, and (2) whether the Court should impose a penalty under section 6673.

Crisan), collectively petitioners, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of - 2 - determination).1 The issue for decision is whether there was an abuse of discretion in the determination that collection action could proceed for 1998 and 1999 (years in issue).

The Notice of Determination On April 10, 2002, respondent sent each trust a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the determination letter), in which respondent stated that collection from each trust of its tax for tax years 1996-97 would proceed.

On May 7, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION GOEKE, Judge: The petition in this case was filed under section 6330(d)1 in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice of determination).

RY LOU AND ALLEN E. JONES, Petitioners ·X. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 3965-02L. Filed February 6, 2003. On Dec. 18, 2001, R mailed to Ps separate, identical Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Sec. 6320 and/or 6330, I.R.C. In addition to the Dec. 18, 2001, date stamped . next to the word "Date", each notice was stamped "FEB 16 2002", in the immediate proximity of the words "in re: Due Process Appeal (Tax Court)". More than 30 days after th

Petitioner’s April 30, 2002, letter demanded that respondent pay her “all allowances, credits, standard deductions, benefits 1993 through 2001.” On May 9, 2002, the Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 in which it determined the following: 1.

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On April 4, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under - 7 - section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On September 12, 2002, the Appeals Office issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) to Mr.

On August 6, 2002, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 relating to 1988 and 1992.

On July 21, 2000, the Appeals Office mailed to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION CHIECHI, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determina- tion).

On May 10, 2002, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 to petitioner regarding her 1997 and 1999 tax years (notice of determination).

On January 11, 2001, respondent issued to petitioners a "Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action (s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330" (notice of determination), notifying petitioners of the determination to proceed with collection of the 1990, 1991, 1995, 1996, and 1997 income tax liabilities.

MEMORANDUM OPINION HAINES, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On February 19, 2002, respondent sent to petitioner by certified mail a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection - 3 - Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.1 On March 28, 2002, the Court received and filed a Petition for Lien or Levy Action Under Code Sections 6320(c) or 6330(d).2 The petition lists the years in dispute as 1991 through 1996.

/ - 5 - On July 22, 2002, the Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) in which it determined the following: i.

On June 18, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioners a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

Petitioner had filed a petition in that case in response to a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 for taxable years 1994, 1995, and 1996.5 Id.

MEMORANDUM OPINION HAINES, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

In a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated July 6, 1999, addressed to petitioner at the Diamond Bar address, respondent determined to proceed with the proposed collection activity because: (1) “All - 7 - statutory requirements have been met”; (2) petitioner’s “allegations that the tax is not owed are unsubstantiated”; and (3) “the proposed collection methods

On February 6, 2001, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On March 22, 2001, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On July 31, 2001, respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, in which respondent determined that the Notice of Federal Tax Lien should not be withdrawn, all legal and procedural requirements for collection had been met, and the filing of the lien was reasonable and not intrusive under the circumstances.

Accordingly, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 concluding that respondent may proceed with collection of petitioner’s 1995 and 1996 tax liabilities was mailed to petitioner, and he appealed to this Court.

On February 7, 2002, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 relating to 1994.

On October 29, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On May 2, 2002, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) under section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

By Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, dated November 15, 2001, respondent determined that the collection period relating to petitioners’ 1982 and 1983 tax liabilities had not expired, petitioners may not claim additional deductions with respect to 1982 and 1983, petitioners offered no collection alternatives, and, thus, it was appropriate to proceed with colle

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION COHEN, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination).

On April 23, 2002, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

ach petitioner’s transferee liability, showing an $89,079.25 unpaid balance of assessment with respect to each petitioner. In separate letters dated May 16, 2001, respondent notified each petitioner of this action and of the right to a hearing under section 6320. E. Petitioners’ Requests for Hearings Each petitioner timely submitted a Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing. Attached to these Forms 12153 were substantially identical memoranda, asserting that each asserted tax li

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION VASQUEZ, Judge: The petition in this case was filed in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 (notice of determination).1 Pursuant to section 6330(d), petitioner seeks review of respondent’s filing of a notice of lien under section 6323.

On October 27, 2001, the Appeals officer issued to petitioner a “Decision Letter Concerning Equivalent Hearing Under Section 6320 and/or 6330" (i.e., the decision letter) for 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1995.

On August 29, 2000, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, for 1995 and 1996 determining to proceed with collection.

On April 7, 2000, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the determination letter), in which respondent stated that all applicable laws and administrative procedures had been met and that collection from petitioner of his tax liability for 1990-97 would proceed.

A Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 was sent to petitioners on September 8, 1999.

r Right to a Hearing under section 6330. In response to this notice, petitioner requested a section 6330 hearing, which occurred during spring 2001. On May 2, 2001, petitioner was sent a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under section 6320/6330. This notice informed petitioner of the following: (1) His right to appeal to this Court, (2) the determination that a levy was the appropriate collection tool, (3) the Internal Revenue Service’s belief that petitioner’s position at

- 3 - Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the notice).

Consistent with this provision, section 6015(e)(1)(A) provides that a petition must be filed: (1) Within 90 days after the date the Secretary mails a notice of final determination of relief to the individual; or (2) if no notice of final determination is issued, no later than 6 months after the date an election is filed with the Secretary.

On July 18, 2000, the Appeals Office issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 stating that respondent would proceed with collection action for the years 1994 through 1997.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On September 21, 2001, respondent sent petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Respondent's Notice of Determination On March 9, 2001, respondent sent petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On May 9, 2001, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On April 4, 2001, respondent issued petitioners separate Notices of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On September 13, 2001, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to his tax liability for 1997.

9, 2001, R sent P a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 regarding the 1991 tax year in which R determined that P was not entitled to raise a spousal defense because she did not file a joint return.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On May 9, 2001, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to petitioner and his wife a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to their tax liability for 1997.

Your case will be closed and a notice of determination issued.” Petitioner took no action, and, on September 28, 2000, respondent mailed petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (the lien or levy determination), notifying petitioner of the determination to proceed with collection of the 1989, 1990, and 1991 income tax liabilities.

- 5 - On September 7, 2000, the Appeals officer issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On June 8, 2001, respondent issued to petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

- 3 - On April 19, 2000, the Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Actions Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) concerning his 1984 tax liability.

Instead, on the basis of the above-mentioned letters and attached documents, Appeals issued to petitioners on July 13, 2000, a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1993, 1995, and 1997.

On October 4, 2001, respondent issued petitioners a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On February 14, 2002, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to his tax liabilities for 1997 and 1998.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On July 12, 2001, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

On August 16, 2001, respondent issued to petitioners duplicate Notices of Determination Concerning Collection -5- Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1998.

On March 16, 2000, respondent issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination), sustaining the proposed collection action.

On August 9, 2000, the Appeals Office issued to petitioners a joint Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 stating that respondent would 2 Execution of Form 870, Waiver of Restrictions on Assessment and Collection of Deficiency in Tax and Acceptance of Overassessment, by a taxpayer signifies the taxpayer’s agreement to adjustments proposed by the Commissioner and the taxpayer’s consent to the immediate assessment of the resultin

On August 8, 2000, the Appeals office sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) under Section 6320 and/or 6330 (determination) sustaining the proposed collection action.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On October 16, 2001, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to his tax liability for 1998.

- 3 - certified mail a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

t-ordered payments 150 Child/dependent care Life insurance 60 Secured/legally-perfected debts Other expenses Loan payments 685 Student loans 210 Total 7,612 On July 19, 2001, a Form 3193, Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, was issued to petitioners in which the Appeals Office “sustained” the notice of intent to levy and verified that “All administrative procedures were followed prior to issuance.”4 On July 30, 2001, petitioners filed a timely

On September 8, 2000, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 for 1985 and 1986.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On November 1, 2001, respondent sent petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: Respondent sent to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 after conducting a hearing under section 6330.

2153 also made a very similar statement registering disagreement with a "Filed Notice of Federal Tax Lien". However, a notice of Federal tax lien filing was not issued to petitioner because the relevant lien was filed in 1996, prior to enactment of sec. 6320 and the corresponding requirement for notice to taxpayers of such agency action. -did not meet the income requirementst'to file san income tax return and the Commissioner has assessed an incorrect stax,; penalties and;interest. b) The Commis

MEMORANDUM OPINION COHEN, Judge: The within proceeding was commenced in response to a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330.

Respondent’s Notice of Determination On July 16, 2001, respondent’s Appeals Office issued to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 with regard to his tax - 8 - liability for 1997.