T.C. Sum m ary Opi ni on 20 13 -7 3

UNITED STAT ES TAX COURT

JAC K R. JANSHEN, Pet it io ne r v. COMM ISSI ONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Resp on de nt

Doc ke t No . 17 51 7- 12 S L. Fi le d S ep te m be r 19 , 20 13 . Ja ckR. Jans he n, p ro se. Lis a M. Os hi ro , forres po nd en t.

SUMM ARY OPINION GERBER, Jud ge : Th is cas e is be in g c on si de redpu rs uantto th e p ro vi si on s of sec ti on 74 63 of the Int ern al Rev enue Co de ineffe ctwhenth e p et it io n was- 2 -

fil ed . Pur su an t t o s ect io n 7 46 3( b) , th e d eci si on to be en te redis no t re vi ewab le by 1 an y othe r co urt, an d thi s o pi ni on sh al l n otbe tre at edas p rece de ntforan y othe r cas e. Thi s ca se in vo lv es a pe ti ti on forrev ie w of ali enor l ev y act io n. Res po nd en t, i n am ot io n fi le d Au gu st14 , 20 13 , m ov edfor su m m ary jud gm en t with re sp ectto th e is su es rai se d i n the pe ti ti on . Peti ti on er was gi ve n 2 0 d ay s t o ob ject o r res po ndan d fa il edto fil e an y res po ns e to res po nd en t’s m ot io n. Fo r th e reas on s o ut li ne d i n thi s o pi ni on , res po nd en t’s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t wi ll be gra nt ed . Bac kg ro un d Res po nd en t m ai le d aFin al Not ic e-No ti ce o f In te ntto Levy andNot ic e o f You r Ri gh t t o aHeari ng to pe ti ti on er o n S ep te m be r 5, 2 01 1, ad vi si ng of the in te nt io n t o l ev y

to co ll ectpe ti ti on er’s unp ai d t ax li ab il ity for20 04 an d o ffer in g an op po rtu ni ty for a h eari ng with the Int ern al Rev enue Serv ic e (IR S) Offi ce o f App eal s (Ap pe al s) . Peti ti on er t im el y m ai le d aFo rm

12 15 3, Re qu es t fo r a Co ll ect io n Du e Pro ces s o r Equ iv al en t Hearin g, o n Oct ob er 6 , 20 11 . Fol lo win g so m e co rres po nd en ce, a t el ep ho ne he ari ng was s ch edul edforFeb ru ary 8, 2 01 2. App eal s co nf

irmed by revi ewin g p et it io ne r’s reco rd s an d tran sc rip t o f acc ou ntth at Unl es s o th erwi se in di cat ed , all sec ti on refe ren ces are t o the Int ern al 1 Rev enue Co de ineffe ctat a ll rel ev an t t im es , andall Ru le refe ren ces are t o the Tax Co urt Ru le s o f Prac ti ce an d P ro cedur e.- 3 -

th e in co m e ta x l iabi li ty hadbe enpro pe rly ass es se d andth e p ro pe r no ti ces ha d be enis su ed . Res po nd en t’s s ettl em en t o ffi cer s po ke with p et it io ne r’s wife ab ou t th e p os si bi li ty of a co ll ect io n a lt ern at iv e, su chas an o ffer -in -co m pr om is e. Pet it io ne r’s wife ask edth atth e h eari ng be res ch edul ed . The h eari ng was res ch edul edto Marc h 1 3, 2 01 2. Pe ti ti on er’s wif e was rem in de d tha t, i n a cco rd with p rio r co rres po nd en ce, p et it io ne r ha d t o s ub m itcert ai n fi nanc ia l i nf orm at io n be fo re the Marc h 1 3, 2 01 2, h eari ng to faci li ta te an y co ns id erat io n o f a co ll ect io n al te rn at iv e. On M arch 13 , 20 12 , th e se tt le m en t o ffi cer t el ep ho ne d p et it io ne r, bu t pe ti ti on er d idno t an swe r an d the set tl em en t o ffi cer l efta vo ic e m es sa ge . On Ap ril 9, 2 01 2, the set tl em en t o ffi cer s po ke with p et it io ne r’s wife an d in fo rm edhe r th atno fin an ci al in fo rm at io n h adbe enrece iv ed . Peti ti on er’s wif e advi se d tha t s he ha d s en t the in fo rm at io n t o p et it io ne r se ve ral week s b efo re Ap ril 9, 2 01 2. Th e se tt le m en t o ffi cer p ro vi de d an o ffi ce ad dr es s, fa x n um be r, an d te le ph on e num

be r, an d a dv is edpe ti ti on er’s wif e th atpe ti ti on er wo ul d b e al lo wed un ti l Ap ril 30 , 20 12 , to pro vi de hi s fi nanc ia l i nf orm at io n. No th in g fu rth er was rece iv edfro m

pe ti ti on er, an d o n J un e 4 , 20 12 , res po nd en t i ss ue d aNot ic e o f Dete rm in at io n C on cern in g C ol le ct io n Act io n( s) Und er Se ct io n 6 32 0 and/o r 63 30 su st ai ni ng th e p ro po se d l ev y to co ll ectpe ti ti on er’s 2 00 4 i nc om e ta x l iabi li ti es .- 4 -

Inhi s p et it io n, p et it io ne r qu es ti on edth e und erl y in g l iabi li ty for 2 00 4, in di cat edth atco ll ect io n wo ul d b e a h ard sh ip , andst at edth athe was e nt it le d t o a co ll ect io n a lt ern at iv e. Pet it io ne r res id edinth e St at e o f W as hi ng to n at the ti m e h is pe ti ti on was fi le d. Befo re thi s co ll ect io n a ct io n, re sp on de ntha d p ro pe rly m ai le d ast atut ory no ti ce o f de fic ie nc y

to pe ti ti on er co nc ern in g h is 20 04 tax y ear. Th ere i s n o ev id en ce tha t the st atut ory no ti ce o f de fic ie nc y

was re tu rn edto th e IRS no r ha s pe ti ti on er ev er d en ie d i ts rece ip t. The un de rlyin g a ss es sm en t fo r th e 2 00 4 i nc om e ta x was m ad e fo ll owi ng pe ti ti on er’s fai lu re t o fi le a pe ti ti on inres po ns e to res po nd en t’s i ss uanc e o f a s ta tu to ry no ti ce o f de fic ie nc y

forth aty ear. Dis cu ss io n Su m m ary jud gm en t i s ap pr op ria te wher e itis sh ownth atth ere i s n o g enui ne di sp ut e as to an y

m at eri al factan d tha t a d eci si on m ay be ren de redas am atte r of law. Rul e 1 21 (b ). Duri ng th e App eal s p ro ces s, p et it io ne r rai se d n o i ss ue s wi th res pe ctto th e m eri ts of the tax li ab il ity . There fo re, the ap pr op ria te st an dardof rev ie w inth is cas e is anab us e o f di sc ret io n s tand ard . See Go za v . Comm is si on er, 11 4 T.C. 1 76 , 18 1- 18 2 (2 00 0) . To es tabl is h an abu se of d is cret io n, the tax pay er m us t s ho w th atth e d eci si on co m pl ai ne d o f is arb itrary, capri ci ou s, o r witho ut so un d b as is infactor l aw. Giam el li v. Co m m is si on er, 1 29 T.C. 10 7, 1 11 (20 07 )- 5 -

(ci ti ng Seg o v . Comm is si on er, 1 14 T.C. 60 4, 6 10 (20 00 ), an d Woo dr al v. Co m m is si on er, 1 12 T.C. 19 , 23 (19 99 )); see als o Kel le r v. C omm is si on er, 5 68 F.3 d 7 10 , 71 6 (9 th Cir . 20 09 ), aff’g i n p artT.C. Mem o. 2 00 6- 16 6. Inrev ie win g fo r ab us e o f di sc ret io n, the Co urt g en eral ly con si de rs on ly the arg um en ts , is su es , an d o th er m atte rs th atwere ra is edat the co ll ect io n due pro ces s h eari ng or othe rwis e b ro ug htto th e at te nt io n o f App eal s. See Giam el li v. Co m m is si on er, 1 29 T.C. at 1 15 ; M ag an a v . Commis si on er, 1 18 T.C. 48 8, 4 93 (20 02 ); s ec. 3 01 .63 30 - 1( f)(2 ), Q&A-F3 Pro ced . & Adm in . Reg s. A no ti ce o f de fic ie nc y

was s en t t o p et it io ne r athi s l as t kno wn ad dr es s, an d he fai le d t o p et it io n thi s C ou rt o r to ch al le ng e th e 2 00 4 i nc om e ta x d efi ci en cy . Und er tho se cir cu m st an ces , pet it io ne r m ay no t ch al le ng e dur in g the co ll ect io n pr oc eed in g the ex is te nc e o r am ou ntof the un de rlyin g 2 00 4 t ax li ab il ity . See Seg o v. Co m m is si on er, 1 14 T.C. 60 4. Acco rd in gl y , th e m eri ts of the 20 04 tax li ab il ity are n otat i ss ue . Pet it io ne r was pro vi de d s ev eral op po rtu ni ti es to pre se ntin fo rm at io n s o tha t co ll ect io n a lt ern at iv es co ul d b e co ns id ered . He di d n otpro vi de th e in fo rm at io n. It is no t an ab us e o f di sc ret io n wh enth e se tt le m en t o ffi cer s us ta in s a p ro po se d co ll ect io n a ct io n o n a cco un t o f th e ta xp ay er’s fai lure t o p ro vi de reque st ed in fo rm at io n tha t wo ul d h av e p erm it te d c on si de rat io n o f co ll ect io n a lt ern at iv es .- 6 -

See Lo ng v. Co m

m is si on er, T.C. Mem o. 2 01 0- 7; Hun tre ss v. Co m m is si on er, T.C. Mem o. 2 00 9- 16 1; Nels on v. Co m m is si on er, T.C. Mem o. 2 00 9- 10 8. W e fi ndth atth ere i s n o g enui ne is su e o f an y m at eri al factfortri al inth is cas e an d h ol d tha t the re was no ab us e o f di sc ret io n i n re sp on de nt ’s dec is io n t o pr oc eedwith c ol le ct io n. Th eref or e, res po nd en t’s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t wil l b e g ran te d. To ref le ctth e fo reg oi ng , An ap pr op ria te ord er an d d eci si on wil l b e en te red .