Opinion
3996-22SL
06-20-2023
RAYMOND MARK PFEIFFER & LYNN M. PFEIFFER, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge.
On March 7, 2022, petitioners filed the Petition to commence this case, in which they seek review of a notice of determination, dated February 7, 2022, issued to petitioners with respect to a levy for their 2016 tax year.
On June 22, 2022, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss on Ground of Mootness asserting that (1) the 2016 income tax liability at issue in this case was fully paid, and (2) because the tax liability has been fully paid, respondent no longer needs and does not intend to pursue collection action against petitioners for their 2016 tax year. Thereafter petitioners filed an Objection to Motion to Dismiss on Ground of Mootness. Therein petitioners assert that (1) they fully paid their 2016 tax liability, (2) despite that full payment, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) erroneously applied a portion of an overpayment for their 2018 tax year to their 2016 account, and (3) they are due a refund for tax year 2018.
The record in this case reflects that petitioners requested a collection due process hearing after the issuance of a Notice CP92, Seizure of Your State Tax Refund and Your Right to a Hearing, for their 2016 tax year. After the hearing, the IRS Independent Office of Appeals issued petitioners a notice of determination concerning collection action dated February 7, 2022. The notice of determination states: "Further levy action is now moot since the tax period listed on the levy notice has been satisfied."
On these facts, petitioners' challenge to the collection action is moot. See Greene-Thapedi v. Commissioner, 126 T.C. 1, 7-8 (2006); cf. Vignon v. Commissioner, 149 T.C. 97, 105 n.4 (2017). This Court does not have jurisdiction to determine an overpayment or order a refund under I.R.C. sections 6320 or 6330. Greene-Thapedi, 126 T.C. at 12-13.
However, although petitioners may not prosecute a case in this Court, they may continue to pursue administrative resolution relating to their 2016 and 2018 tax years directly with the IRS. Another remedy potentially available to petitioners, if feasible, is to file a claim for refund with the IRS, and then (if the claim is denied or not acted on for six months), bring a suit for refund in the appropriate Federal district court or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. See McCormick v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 138, 142 n.5 (1970).
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss on Ground of Mootness is granted and this case is dismissed.