Opinion ID: 4544634
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Byers’s Abuse-of-Process Argument

Text: The IRS’s satisfaction of the prima-facie burden is not the end of the case. “Once th[e] [prima-facie] showing is made, the burden shifts to the taxpayer to demonstrate that enforcement of the summons would be an abuse of the court’s process.” Will, 671 F.2d at 966. “Such an abuse would take place if the summons had been issued for an improper purpose, such as to harass the taxpayer or to put pressure on him to settle a collateral dispute, or for any other purpose reflecting on the good faith of the particular investigation.” Powell, 379 U.S. at 58. The burden to demonstrate an abuse of process “is a heavy one.” Kondik, 81 F.3d at 656. In order to carry it, a petitioner must set forth “specific facts and evidence to support [its] allegations.” Cypress Funds, Inc. v. United States, No. 99-3840, 2000 WL 1597833, at  (6th Cir. Oct. 20, 2000) (alteration in original) (quoting Liberty Fin. Servs. v. United States, 778 F.2d 1390, 1392 (9th Cir. 1985)). In support of her abuse-of-process allegations, Byers submitted a declaration, which professes her innocence and states that Agent Conroy has never informed her what she or her exNo. 19-1893 Byers v. IRS Page 15 husband may have done to violate the law. R. 8-2 (Byers Decl. ¶¶ 4, 20–22) (Page ID #147–49). Yet nowhere in the declaration does Byers explain what nefarious purpose the IRS has for investigating her. Her statements do not carry the “heavy” burden of demonstrating an abuse of process, and the district court did not clearly err in rejecting this argument.