proceeding which shifts or what kind of proceeding  relief that's discretionary to the commissioner of the secretary of the treasury i'm not sure how the statute with regard to the burden of proof when you're proving up the tax liability in the first place how this action speaks to what we're facing today equitable grounds to the secretary and if something is committed to an administrator's discretion how is it this burden of proof can get shifted back to the secretary decide not to exercise its discretion when to disconnect there again we're talking about the level of evidence that's being submitted clearly the burden of proof starts with the taxpayer and you have to produce credible evidence on these  respect to individuals who were seeking this kind of believe congress was and was attempting to in effect shift a little bit of the sellers back to the i r s not entirely clearly the taxpayer has to come forward first i discretion was properly exercised and that's not a high standard for the i r s to meet but it certainly puts the onus back on the iraqis to show it seems to lose the discretion standard because you're basically treating this as adjudication where you have to show by preponderous they haven't seen the burden shifted to the service to disprove by planners of the evidence but if it's discretionary decision in the first place it seems like you flush the discretion out of it but what's the standard the secretary supposed to apply individual of such liability and i think you might have something but if it says the secretary made say may suggest that even if these things are proven the secretary doesn't have to but to apply the adjudication system that you've discussed  secretary would have to and not only that would have to bear the burden of proof if the taxpayer came forward with some level of credible evidence to begin with well again i think that the taxpayer but at the time of the tax court proceeding this disposable income was basically two to three hundred dollars a month maybe a little bit more how do you pay a five hundred thousand dollars tax liability with the supposedly come of the less than a thousand dollars a month amount of money he makes would be between forty five and forty eight thousand dollars that that's what the iris would look at and say you're entitled to set that money aside to meet your basic living expenses that's their national standard and see if we can negotiate a settlement in this case you could go she ate something that would work but if they're looking for thirty or forty or fifty thousand dollars a year in interest payments and then principal payments on top of that and show what this financial condition was what is what is actual bills and payments were like or what has documentary evidence he's basically saying take my word for it i only make this much money and these are my bills and i think if we've learn anything from this record that you can't take somebody is word for it when it comes to assessing their financial situation and i think on the economic hardship that's what it's boil require to bring all the records that we ha know we have a mediation service that you know that the government is is happy to come to a reasonable settlement but the problem is not is not a question of whether or not some of the flying talk to the government it's a question of of getting a reasonable offer and also getting proof of taxpayers financial situation you know  partner in the firm now the firm had he said the firm had an additional seven hundred thousand dollars debt now i think this is even math that lawyers can do but you have a seven hundred thousand dollars debt for partners and they're and they're getting hundred thousand dollars paid off for each of them each year the debt would be gone in two years for less than two years and then they do the math for him his income and then go up to two hundred thirty thousand dollars  think the record shows that the firm although it had a hard times immediately in the aftermath of this it improved to the fact that to the point where they could pay my hundred thousand dollars and pay off one hundred thousand dollars  partner and that's a substantial income potential i think also to correct a few things i think that would represent to the court