Monday, March 21, 2011

We submitted an Offer in Compromise for a client (IRS Offer Number 1000877465) following the statute, SECTION 7122, the regulations under section 7122, and the Internal Revenue Manual (IRM). We carefully prepared the applicable Form 656, prepared the financial statements (with all required attachments), and sent it to the IRS. The IRM states that the IRS will accept an offer if it is based on "reasonable collection potential, which is based on assets and income in excess or reasonable and necessary living expenses. We made that calculation and made an Offer to the IRS based on that "reasonable collection potential." We received a letter from the IRS Centralized in Holtsville NY. The letter states that the offer was submitted solely to hinder or delay IRS collection actions based on the request by Revenue Officer E. Jackson at 516 683-5352. I called Ms. Jackson, asking to speak with her manager. In short, even though we have an offer that meets all of the requirements under law, a Revenue Officer, who is a collection officer, asked the IRS Service Center to Return the Offer. I believe that this is IRS misconduct under section 7214. In effect the Revenue Officer has disqualified the Offer even if the Offer meets all of the requirements of section 7122 - law passed by Congress. This has become a systemic problem. Section (06-01-2010)states that an OIC can be returned if: 1. A prior offer exists 2. The prior offer was rejected with appeal rights 3. The prior offer was defaulted in the prior year. The Offer was waiting for assignment when it was rejected by the Revenue Officer. The Service Center had no information about the Offer other than the fact that Ms. Jackson wanted it be based on the "solely to delay" standard. I have previously brought this practice to the attention of the National Taxpayer Advocate but that office does nothing to help remove this unlawful veto proper that Revenue Officers have over the IRS Offers in Compromise. I repeat the point that when an IRS person does not follow the law that is passed by Congress (section 7122 in this case) that is a clear case of misconduct under section 7214. I For

No comments: