The Tax Court did not err when it summarily sustained a proposed levy to collect an individual’s unpaid penalties for one tax year and delinquent tax for another tax year. The taxpayer had failed to participate in the supplemental Collection Due Process hearing and did not explicitly challenge those penalties in his petition. Therefore, he was not entitled to contest those penalties in the Tax Court. Moreover, the taxpayer did not directly address the IRS’s determination to sustain the levy and instead raised an incomprehensible argument about an alleged state (Pennsylvania) court judgment and its preclusive effect. Finally, the taxpayer raised tax protester–type arguments about his status under the “negotiable instruments law” as a “secured party creditor.”
Unpublished opinion affirming, per curiam, the Tax Court 115 TCM 1204, Dec. 61,156(M), TC Memo. 2018-48.
R. Jennette, CA-3
Code Sec. 6330
CCH Reference – 2018FED ¶38,184.109
Tax Research Consultant
CCH Reference – TRC IRS: 51,056.25