Opinion
11835-20L
03-22-2022
ANGELA M. CHAVIS, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Albert G. Lauber Judge
In this collection due process (CDP) case, petitioner seeks review of the determination by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or respondent) to uphold the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien (NFTL). The NFTL arose out of petitioner's failure to pay trust fund recovery penalties (TFRPs) that were assessed against her and her husband under section 6672. Petitioner timely submitted a Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process or Equivalent Hearing, checking the boxes "I Cannot Pay Balance," "Lien Withdrawal," and "Innocent Spouse Relief."
All statutory references are to the Internal Revenue Code, Title 26 U.S.C., in effect at all relevant times.
Petitioner's case was assigned to a settlement officer (SO) in the IRS Independent Office of Appeals. In July 2019 petitioner was directed to complete Form 8857, Request for Innocent Spouse Relief. Petitioner completed that form, and the SO forwarded it to the IRS's Cincinnati Centralized Innocent Spouse Operation (CCISO). CCISO confirmed receipt on July 29, 2019. However, the record in this case does not reflect whether CCISO reviewed petitioner's claim or made a final determination.
Petitioner's CDP hearing took place on November 19, 2019. During the hearing the SO advised petitioner that her innocent spouse claim could not be considered because section 6015 "do[es] not apply to trust fund liabilities[, ] only joint liabilities." The SO also determined that petitioner could not challenge her liability for the TFRPs because she had, but declined to take advantage of, a prior opportunity to challenge them. On August 19, 2020, the IRS issued petitioner a notice of determination sustaining the NFTL filing, concluding that "innocent spouse claim[s] do not apply to trust fund penalties" and that petitioner did not meet the criteria for lien withdrawal under section 6323(j).
Petitioner timely petitioned this Court, challenging her underlying liability for the TFRPs and the propriety of the collection action. On January 13, 2021, respondent filed a Motion for Summary Judgment contending that (1) petitioner cannot challenge her underlying liability for the TFRPs because she had a prior opportunity to do so, and (2) the SO did not abuse her discretion in sustaining the collection action. Respondent notes the SO's statement that taxpayers cannot secure innocent spouse relief from TFRPs, but the Motion does not address the merits of that position.
Section 6015 generally applies to liabilities arising from "a joint return." See § 6015(a)(1). Section 6015(f)(1)(A), however, sets forth conditions for obtaining relief from "any unpaid tax or any deficiency." Section 6671(a) provides that "any reference in this title to 'tax' . . . shall be deemed also to refer to the penalties" imposed by Subchapter B of the Code, which includes TFRPs under section 6672.
We request that respondent file a response to this Order addressing the question whether, under section 6015(f), petitioner may in this CDP case seek relief from her TFRP liabilities. And because the record currently appears to include no information about what happened to the Form 8857 that the SO forwarded CCISO, we request that respondent include information about this in his response.
In consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that, on or before April 18, 2022, respondent shall file a response to this Order addressing the matters discussed above. It is further
ORDERED that petitioner may file if she wishes, by May 18, 2022, a reply to respondent's response.