Opinion
12187-21L
10-24-2022
JENNIFER KATHLEEN COOPER & GEORGE DAVID BRANDON COOPER, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On March 1, 2022, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to George David Brandon Cooper on the ground that no notice of determination concerning collection action was issued to him for tax year 2010, nor has respondent made any other determination with respect to petitioner George David Brandon Cooper for tax year 2010 that would confer jurisdiction on the Court.
On June 23, 2021, petitioners filed the petition purporting to dispute a notice of determination concerning collection action issued to petitioners for tax year 2010. Petitioners failed to attach a notice of determination concerning collection action to the petition. A copy of the notice of determination concerning collection action issued to petitioner Jennifer K. Cooper is attached to respondent's above-mentioned motion.
This Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. It may therefore exercise jurisdiction only to the extent expressly provided by statute. Breman v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 61, 66 (1976). In a case seeking the redetermination of a deficiency, the jurisdiction of the Court depends, in part, on the issuance by the Commissioner of a valid notice of deficiency to the taxpayer. Rule 13(c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Frieling v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 42, 46 (1983). The notice of deficiency has been described as "the taxpayer's ticket to the Tax Court" because, without it, there can be no prepayment judicial review by this Court of the deficiency determined by the Commissioner. Mulvania v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 65, 67 (1983).
Similarly, this Court's jurisdiction in a case seeking review of a determination concerning collection action under section 6320 or 6330, depends, in part, upon the issuance of a valid notice of determination by the IRS Office of Appeals under section 6320 or 6330. I.R.C. sec. 6320(c) and 6330(d)(1); Rule 330(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492, 498 (2000). A condition precedent to the issuance of a notice of determination is the requirement that a taxpayer have requested a hearing before the IRS Office of Appeals within the 30-day period specified in section 6320(a) or 6330(a), and calculated with reference to an underlying Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC 6320 or Final Notice of Intent To Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing.
On June 23, 2022, petitioners filed a Response to Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to George David Brandon Cooper. In their Response, petitioners state that they object to respondent's motion because they filed a joint return for tax year 2010 and payment of the 2010 taxes has been satisfied via a lien that was paid as of December 2021. Petitioners do not dispute the jurisdictional allegations set forth in respondent's motion.
Unfortunately, while the Court may be sympathetic to petitioners' situation, petitioners' contention cannot provide a basis in these circumstances to allow George David Brandon Cooper to remain a litigant in this case. The existence of a notice issued to a taxpayer permits participation as a named party in a Tax Court proceeding, not his or her status as married to or filing joint returns with another taxpayer.
Petitioners have not provided a copy of a notice of determination that would confer jurisdiction on this Court as to George David Brandon Cooper. Because no notice of determination sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court has been sent to petitioner George David Brandon Cooper, this case must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to petitioner George David Brandon Cooper.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to George David Brandon Cooper is granted and so much of this case relating to petitioner George David Brandon Cooper is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. It is further
ORDERED that the caption in this case is amended to read: "Jennifer Kathleen Cooper, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent".