2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 4-6-2005 

# Rog gio v . C ommi s sione r IR S P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 04-2438

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" Ro ggio v . C ommi s sione r I R S " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1391. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/1391NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL
U N I TED STA TES C O U RT O F A PPEA LS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 04- 2438 V i ncentR oggi o; C al l i e Lasc h A p p e llan ts

v. C om m i s s i onerof I nt ernal R evenue O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es T ax C o u rt

N o . 0 0 9 0 -1 T ax C o u rtJu d g e: H o n o rab le R o b ert W h erry , Jr. Subm i t t ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

M ar ch 8, 2005 B E FO R E : N Y G A A R D , M cK E E & R E N D E L L , C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: A pr i l 6, 2005) OP I NI ON P E R C U R I A M. V i ncentR oggi o and C al l i e Lasc h ( “Taxpay er s ”) appea l an O r derof t he U ni t ed S tate s T a x C o u rt in w h ich th e c o u rt c o n c lu d e d th a t th e C o m m iss io n e r d id n o t ab u se h is di s cr et i on i n fi l i ng a l i en on pr oper t yow ned byT axpay er s i n an ef for tt o col l ecta t ax l i abi l i t yfort he t ax y ear2000 thatw as admi t t edl ydue and ow i ng. T axpay er s ar gue that th e ir d e m o n stra ted g o o d f a ith , w h ich in c lu d e d e n ter in g in to a n in sta llm e n t p lan to di s char ge the l i abi l i t y , s houl d have pr ecl uded the C om m i s s i onerfr om engagi ng i n w hat t heyr efe rt o as “a ve r yi nt rus i ve col l ect i on t echni que. ” See A p p e l l a n t s ’ b r i e f a t5 . We2

wi l l a f f i r m. I nas m uch as w e w r i t e onl yfort he part i es w ho ar e fa m i l i arw i t h t he bac kgr ound of t hi s cas e, w e nee d notr ei t er at e t he fa ctual orpr ocedur al hi s t or y . A ppel l ant s have
s ubm i t t ed a br i ef c ons i s t i ng of t w o par agr aphs of ar gum ent , w i t houtci t at i on t o anyl egal author i t y , i n w hi ch theyar gue that , “[i ] n a cr edi t - bas ed s oci ety , a l i en i s a veryi nt rus i ve col l ect i on t echni que. ” I d. a t 5 . W e have r evi ew ed the t r ans cr i ptfr om t he benc h opi ni on of t he Tax C our tdat ed February9, 2004. I n t hatopi ni on, t he H onor abl e R ober tW herr y , J r . , expl ai ns w hyt he C o m m iss io n e r d id n o t ab u se h is d isc re tio n in f ili n g th e lien th a t is th e su b jec t o f th is di s put e. W e w i l l aff

i r m t hi s fr i vol ous appea l s ubs t ant i al l yfort he r eas ons s etfor t h by J udge W herr yi n hi s bench opi ni on.