Progar & Company, P.A.
Certified Public Accounting services for businesses and individuals
Administrative appeal of IRS levies (MS Word)
Administrative appeal of IRS levies (.pdf)
Administrative appeal of IRS levies
Dear Reader:
You recently asked what can be done if IRS attempts to levy against
your property. Suits against IRS or its employees over IRS levy
actions are available only in limited situations. But, there are
three less restrictive ways to contest levies by administrative
appeals within IRS.
One way to appeal a levy within IRS is by using the Collection
Appeals Program (CAP). Under the CAP, a taxpayer may appeal liens,
levies, seizures, and proposed denials or terminations of
installment agreements. When the taxpayer appeals his case IRS will
normally stop collection action until the appeal is settled, unless
it has reason to believe the collection of the tax is in jeopardy.
Once a decision is made in the case, the decision is binding on both
the taxpayer and IRS.
A second method of administrative appeal is by use of the Collection
Due Process (CDP) program. A CDP hearing before levy is available in
levy cases where the taxpayer has received a notice of intent to
levy. A notice of intent to levy is accompanied by a notification in
writing of the taxpayer's right to a hearing before levy. If the
taxpayer requests a hearing, the hearing will be conducted by an
officer or employee in IRS's Office of Appeals who did not
previously participate in matters involving the taxpayer and the
unpaid tax at issue. IRS doesn't have to send a notice of intent to
levy (1) if it finds that collection of tax is in jeopardy, (2)
before levying on a state to collect a federal tax liability from a
state tax refund or (3) for “disqualified employment tax levies.”
However, in such cases a post-levy CDP hearing is available. Like
CAP hearings, CDP hearings are informal. A CDP hearing doesn't
require a face-to-face meeting, but a taxpayer can ordinarily get a
face-to-face meeting if he wants it, except where he makes only
irrelevant or frivolous arguments.
Filing an application with the office of the Taxpayer Advocate is a
third method of administrative appeal of a proposed levy. The
Taxpayer Advocate or his designee can issue a Taxpayer Assistance
Order (TAO) based on a determination that the taxpayer is suffering
or is about to suffer a significant hardship as a result of the way
in which the tax laws are being administered by IRS. Relief can
include suspension of collection actions and release of a levy.
There are many differences to be considered in determining which of
these methods of administrative appeal to use. One of the most
important differences concerns the right of review. A determination
in a CDP hearing may be appealed to the Tax Court, but there is no
right to judicial review in the CAP or TAO process.
An important disadvantage of the CDP is that the taxpayer must
request a hearing within the 30-day period beginning on the day
after the date he receives notice of his right to a hearing. This
time limit cannot be waived, however, a written request submitted
within the 30-day period that does not satisfy content requirements
is considered timely if the request is perfected within a reasonable
period of time. If the request for a CDP hearing is untimely, either
because the request was not submitted within the 30-day period or
not perfected within the reasonable period provided, the taxpayer
will be notified of the untimeliness of the request and offered an
“equivalent hearing.” But an equivalent hearing does not suspend any
collection action against the taxpayer and no judicial review of the
hearing determination is available. In contrast, both the TAO and
CAP are not subject to a time limit tied to the notice of levy and
are available both before and after a levy is imposed on property.
Both the TAO and CAP are also generally quicker procedures than the
CDP.
There are also significant differences in the types of problems that
can be considered under each process. Under the CDP process, a
taxpayer may contest the underlying tax liability if certain
conditions are met, while such a contest is not possible in the CAP
or the TAO. On the other hand, the CDP process is not available to
nominees of, persons holding property of, or persons holding
property with respect to, the taxpayer, but such persons may use the
TAO or CAP. Another distinction is that IRS will not consider trust
fund recovery penalties, offers in compromise, or penalty abatement
appeals under CAP procedures.
A $5,000 penalty is imposed on any person who submits a request for
a CDP hearing or an application for a TAO (or submits any one of
certain other types of specified submissions) if any portion of the
submission is either based on a position which IRS has identified as
frivolous, or reflects a desire to delay or impede the
administration of federal tax laws. However, the penalty is clearly
aimed at those who abuse the process and should not deter taxpayers
with legitimate disputes from using the CDP or TAO process.
If you would like further information on pursuing any of these
options, please do not hesitate to call.
Lewes CPA
office