TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Haidee Joy
Docket Number: 878-07L
Judge: Haines
Opinion Type: memo
Filed: 08/25/2008
Pages: 6

T .C . Memo . 2008-19 7 UNITED STATES TAX COUR T HAIDEE JOY, Petitioner v . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Responden t Docket No . 878-07 L . Filed August 25', ?008 . Haidee Joy, pro se . Laura L . . Buckley , for respondent . MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINIO N HAINES, Judge : Pursuant. to section 6330(d),' petit .}one r seeks review of respondent's determination to proceed with th e collection of petitioner's unpaid .1992, 1993, and 1995 (fears at issue) Federal income tax liabilities . The issue is whether the 'Unless otherwise indicated, section references are Internal Revenue Code, as in effect for the years-at is s SERVED Aug 25 2008 filing-of a notice of Federal tax lien is barred by the period of -2- limitations on collection under section 6502 . FINDINGS OF FAC T Petitioner resided in California at the time her petitio n was filed . Petitioner filed Federal income tax returns for the years a t issue but failed to pay the balances shown as due on the returns . On September 5, 1997, petitioner and respondent executed a Form 900, Tax Collection Waiver, extending the period of limitations on collection activities until December 31, 2011, for, inter alia, the years at issue . On November 10,-1997 -petit-ioner and respondent entered into an installment agreement by which petitioner would pay the outstanding liabilities . At_some point undisclosed in the record, petitioner defaulted on the installment agreement . 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 wit h 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 liens associated with your notices of amount due be released ." -3- On October 11, 2006, respondent's Appeals officer s ent petitioner a letter scheduling a telephone conference an requesting financial data . - .On October-1=7,_ 2.006, petitio .the Appeals officer a letter requesting a correspondence On November 11, 2006, the Appeals officer sent petitione r a letter and a copy of the previously executed Form 900 . Petitioner replied, . stating that the amounts listed on the Form 900 were related to her Forms .941, Employer's Quarterly Federal Tax Return, not her Forms 1040, 1 U .S . Individual Income Ta x Return . Petitioner further'stated .'that she would not provide the requested financial information because the period fors llectio n had expired . On December 8, . 2006, respondent's Appeals Office is ued a Notice of Determination Concerning- .Collection Action-(s) nder Section 6320 and/or 6330 for the years at issue . Respon en t .determined that .all appropriate requirements of law and : administrative procedures had been met, that . the notic e Federal tax lien balanced the need-for efficient . collect' on with the concerns of the taxpayer that collection be no .more intrusive than necessary, and that- .the statutory period for collec .ion .had not expired . Accordingly, the notice .of Federal tax lie wa s sustained in full . -4- OPINIO N Section 6320(a) requires that the Commissioner furnish a taxpayer with- written notice' of the filing .of a Federal tax -lien within 5 business days after the lien is filed . 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 . Sec . 6320(a)(3)(B), (b)(1) . If the taxpayer requests a hearing under section 6320, an Appeals officer of th e Commissioner must hold the hearing . Sec . 6320(b)(1) . Within 3 0 S days of . the issuance of the Appeals officer's determination, the taxpayer may .seek judicial review of the determination . Sec . 6330(d)(1) . Petitioner claims that the period of limitations on collection expired before the notice of Federal tax lien was mailed to her and therefore respondent's notice of Federal tax lien was unenforceable and should be withdrawn . See secs . 6322, 6325, 6326 . Generally, the period of limitations for collection of assessed Federal income taxes begins on the-date taxes are assessed and ends 10 years thereafter . Sec . 6502(a)(1) ; Sever o v . Commissioner , 129 T .C . 160, 168 (2007) . Before-the 10-year period of limitations expires, it may be extended for any period - 5 agreed upon in. writing by the Commissioner and the taxpa er . 2 Sec . 6502(a)(,2) ; sec . 301 .6502-1(a) (2,) (i) , bProced . & Admin . Regs . (as in effect on September 5, 1.997 .) ; see United States v . Con r 631 F .2d 599,. 599 (9th Cir ., 1980 .) . However, in . 1998 . Con res s enacted-the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring . andR form Ac t of 1998 (RRA), Pub . L . 105-206, sec .- .34 .61(c)(2), 112 Sta 764 , which provides that an,ext,ension entered into on or befor e December 31,-1 .999, expires on the latest of (1) the last day o f the 10-year period under section . 6502(a),(1) ; (2) December 31 , 2002 ; .or (3) in the case of an extension in connection with an, installment agreement, the 90th day after the end of the perio d .of, such extension . . McArdle v . Commissioner, T .C . Memo . 008-189 . On September 5, 1997, well within the 10-year period fo r collection, the parties agreed to extend the period fo r collection until December.31, 2011 .. Petitioner testified tha t she signed the extension so that :she could enter into a n installment agreement . .. Accordingly,, the Court finds that the extension was entered into in connection with an installment agreement . Under section 6502(a)(2), and RRA section 3461(c)(2), the period for collection expires on'the 90th day after Decembe r 2Congress has since enacted a new sec . 6502(a)(2) to provid e that extensions of the,10-year period of limitations o n collection made after Dec . :-31', 1999, maybe made only in certai n situations, including an extension made in connection wi h a n installment agreement . Internal Revenue Service Restruc urin g and Reform Act of .1998, Pub .-„L . 105-206, sec . 3461, 112 tat . 764 ; see sec . 301 .6502-1(b), Proced . . & Admin . Regs . 6'- 31, 2011, and the collection period had not expired 'when the notice of Federal tax lien was sent on June 22, 2006 . 3 Contrary to petitioner's assertion, the Form'900~clearly shows that the unpaid tax liabilities at issue relate to Form 1040 individual income tax liabilities, not Form'941 employer tax, liabilities . Petitioner offered-no evidence which would indicate' the information provided on the Form 900 is inaccurate . Petitioner also alleges that she signed the Form 900 under duress .. However, she offered nd evidence to support the allegation . Accordingly, the Court finds that the parties extended the period of limitations on collection of petitioner's unpaid Federal income tax liabilities for the years at issue and that the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien is'not barred by section 6502 . Petitioner presented no other basis for her claim that the notice of Federal tax lien is inappropriate : Therefore ; the notice of Federal tax lien is sustained in full . To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered fo r respondent . 'The Court also notes that the period for°collection under sec . 6502 was suspended on July 6 2006, the date petitioner requested a hearing under sec . 6320,'and will continue to be suspended during the period'in'which the hearing and any related appeal are pending . See secs . 6320(c), 6330(e)(1) ; Boyd v . Commissioner , 117 T .C . 127, 130-131 (2001) .