Bryan Camp has published an article on the TaxProf Blog, titled “Lesson From The Tax Court: CDP Settlement Officer Must Work Previously Rejected OIC”, which discusses the outcomes of Katherine Mason, et. al, v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2021-64 (May 20, 2021) (Judge Holmes) with regards to the IRC Office of Appeals and the merits of an Offer of Compromise. The article begins as follows:
Last week’s case of Katherine Mason, et. al, v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2021-64 (May 20, 2021) (Judge Holmes), teaches that the IRS Office of Appeals must consider in a CDP hearing the merits of an Offer In Compromise (OIC) that a prior office found was submitted solely to delay collection. I kid you not. Agreeing with the taxpayer that “the CDP process is aimed very deliberately to give most taxpayers an opportunity to delay collection,” Op. at 21, Judge Holmes held that the CDP Settlement Officer abused her discretion when she refused to consider an OIC on its merits, even though she found it had been properly rejected for having been submitted precisely for purposes of delay. Yes folks, welcome once again to the wacky world of Collection Delay Process. I also see the case as teaching us both the value—and the limits on value—added by judicial review. Finally, I think the taxpayer simply won the opportunity to lose again. See if you agree. Details below the fold.
Click here to see the full article: “Lesson From The Tax Court: CDP Settlement Officer Must Work Previously Rejected OIC”
Posted by Marin Larkin, Associate Editor, Wealth Strategies Journal.