Cir
Industrial Investors v. Commissioner
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Industrial Investors (“Taxpayer”) appeals from the Tax Court’s decision sustaining a notice of determination issued by the Office of Appeals, which sustained a levy against Taxpayer for unpaid taxes.
Taxpayer can no longer challenge the amount of its underlying tax liability because that has been fully adjudicated. I.R.C. § 6330(c)(2)(B). Therefore, the Tax Court correctly reviewed the decision of the Office of Appeals for abuse of discretion. See Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000). We review the Tax Court’s decision de novo, which means we review the Office of Appeals for abuse of discretion. See Fargo v. Commissioner, 447 F.3d 706, 709 (9th Cir.2006). “Abuse of discretion occurs when a decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the facts.” Fargo, 447 F.3d at 709 (internal quotation marks omitted).
Taxpayer argues that the Office of Appeals abused its discretion by insisting upon recording the August 8th meeting with Taxpayer’s lawyer W.G. Wells over Wells’s objections. I.R.C. § 7521(a) permits an officer of the IRS to record “any in-person interview with any taxpayer relating to the determination or collection…