Opinion
14657-22L
11-18-2022
JOSE JAVIER BENITEZ, SR., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Mark V. Holmes, Judge
This case is on the January 30, 2023 Los Angeles, California trial calendar. It's based on a notice of determination by the IRS that it should levy on the Mr. Benite's assets to collect an unpaid tax debt.
Mr. Benitez lives in California, which means that Tax Court's review of the IRS's decision is subject to Keller v. Commissioner, 568 F.3d 710, 718 (9th Cir. 2009). This case requires the Tax Court to follow what lawyers call the "record rule." What this means is that the Court has to look at the same things that the IRS looked at during the collection due process hearing (the so-called "administrative record") to decide whether the IRS abused its discretion in upholding the levy. It's best if the parties can agree on what the administra tive record is. It is therefore
ORDERED that on or before December 30, 2022, counsel for the IRS and Mr. Benitez stipulate (i.e., agree) to what the administrative record in this case is. If they are unable to do so, counsel for the IRS shall serve Mr. Benitez with an index listing the documents that the IRS thinks should be in the administrative record. The Court urges the IRS to make this index comprehensible to a nonlawyer. If the parties have not agreed on what the administrative record is, it is also
ORDERED that January 13, 2023 Mr. Benitez: (1) provide the IRS with any evidence that he thinks should be added to the administrative record but is not in the IRS index and (2) list any documents in the IRS index that he thinks should not be in the administrative record.
If the parties do not settle the case by January 30, 2023, the Court intends to limit any trial to the proper contents of the administrative record. It will also hear at that time any arguments from both parties about whether or not the IRS did abuse its discretion in upholding the levy, and about whether there is any reason to send the case back to the IRS for reconsideration because of new evidence or a change in circumstances since the collection due process hearing was held.