Tax Court In Brief | Mamadou v. Comm'r | Collection Due Process; Challenge To Underlying Tax Liability

• Jurisdiction: United States,Federal
• Law Firm: Freeman Law
• Subject Matter: Tax, Income Tax, Tax Authorities
• Author: Freeman Law
• Published date: 05 January 2023

The Tax Court in Brief - December 19th - December 23rd, 2022

Freeman Law's "The Tax Court in Brief" covers every substantive Tax Court opinion, providing a weekly brief of its decisions in clear, concise prose.

For a link to our podcast covering the Tax Court in Brief, download here or check out other episodes of The Freeman Law Project.

Tax Litigation: The Week of December 19th, 2022, through December 23rd, 2022

• Brooks v. Comm'r, T.C. Memo. 2022-122 | December 19, 2022 |Wells, J. |Docket No 28206-15
• Ayria v Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2022-123 | December 19, 2022 | Lauber, J.| Dkt. No 13745-20
• Starer v. Comm'r, T.C. Memo. 2022-124 | December 20, 2022 |Wells, J. |Docket No. 615-13
• Schwartz v. Comm'r, T.C. Memo 2022-125| December 21, 2022 | Vasquez, J. | Dkt. No 17291-14L

Mamadou v. Comm'r, T.C. Memo. 2022-121 | December 20, 2022 | Lauber, J. | Dkt. No. 9759-21L

Short Summary: This collection due process ("CDP") case involves whether a taxpayer is entitled to challenge his underlying tax liabilities for unreported income for the 2015 and 2016 tax years after he failed to failed to respond to the IRS's notice of deficiency, failed to participate in the CDP hearing, and failed to respond to the settlement officer ("SO") from the IRS Office of Appeals.

The IRS examined taxpayer's 2015 and 2016 tax returns after receiving third-party reports showing unreported income. The IRS issued taxpayer a notice of deficiency for these amounts and sent it via certified mail to his last known address in Bronx, NY. The Bronx address was used on his 2016 tax return, and was the same address that petition used when he filed his petition in the Tax Court challenging the IRS's CDP determination. Taxpayer did not file a petition in the Tax Court challenging the notice of deficiency. Accordingly, the IRS assessed the tax liabilities determined in the notice. Taxpayer did not pay the liabilities upon notice and demand. To collect the tax liability, the IRS filed a Notice of Federal Tax Lien and sent taxpayer a Lien Notice to the Bronx address notifying him of his right to a CDP hearing.

Taxpayer timely requested a CDP hearing but instead of proposing a collection alternative stated that he did not have a chance to fight the deficiency determination and wanted to challenge the underlying liability. The IRS SO sent taxpayer a letter scheduling a telephone CDP hearing and noted in the letter that it would be taxpayer's opportunity to explain why he disagreed with the collection...