Re: [tips_and_tricks] IRS: control of identified matters with widespread impact
The policies in Policy Statement P-8-47 are replicated in the following IRM sections:
Conference Techniques Used by Appeals Technical Employees
Conference techniques used by Appeals technical employees vary depending on the types of cases but there is no substitution for preparation, judgment, and common sense when conducting an Appeals conference.
Be thoroughly prepared for all aspects of a case. This maximizes the possibility of closing the case with one conference while resolving the disputed issues in a quasi-judicial manner. It is essential to have an open mind and genuine interest in achieving a mutually acceptable agreement.
Set realistic target dates for the taxpayer and/or the representative to submit additional information, and proposal and counterproposal settlements. Ensure they understand the need to adhere to the dates set.
Completing a conference timely and making accurate and prompt decisions enables the taxpayer to know with the least amount of delay, the final decision of the Internal Revenue Service regarding the amount of tax liability, or other issues in dispute.
Appeals conferences are informal to promote frank discussion and mutual understanding. Do not consider ideological kinds of arguments. Handle conferences objectively with a goal of reaching a sound decision based upon the merits of the issues in dispute.
Conduct conferences in an open atmosphere that fosters cooperation in the resolution of disputes. Above all, it is of utmost importance to be a good listener.
Hold conferences on dates and in locations reasonably convenient to taxpayers and representatives. Generally, use Appeals offices, sub-offices, or other IRS-staffed posts of duty that are not temporary or part-time locations. However, managers may approve holding conferences at other sites when feasible and necessary to provide a convenient conference opportunity. Ordinarily, the amount in dispute is not an important factor in approving another conference site.
Hold the number of conferences to a minimum. A frank discussion of the facts and law ordinarily brings a case to a prompt conclusion.
Evaluate the merits of all circuit riding requests and consider the reasons the taxpayer and Appeals technical employee needs to meet face-to-face. Some factors to consider:
The case involves factual issues that would merit a face-to-face meeting
There are substantial books and records to review. Since Appeals is not the first finder of fact, arrangements should be made through the Appeals Team Manager to have a revenue agent or Tax Compliance Officer available to review any substantial books and records before and/or during the conference
The taxpayer will be present and the Appeals technical employee will be able to determine the credibility of the oral testimony
The taxpayer has presented valid reasons why he/she cannot come to the nearest Appeals Office. These reasons could include the special needs of a disabled or low-income taxpayer.
The distance the taxpayer would have to travel would be unreasonable or cause a hardship
Allow circuit riding when the taxpayer's residence (or business address for business entities) is more than 150 miles from the nearest Appeals Office.
Area Directors have the discretion of reducing the number of miles based on their geographic reality or on a case-by-case basis.
Allow circuit riding if the nearest Appeals Office cannot take the case due to high inventories or lack of technical skills, or if there is no convenient alternative.
Appeals technical employees will circuit ride at least quarterly to meet the needs of each and every taxpayer.
In the states where Appeals no longer has a presence, we have a small presence, or we may not have the technical expertise, the designated circuit riding location is shown below:
State with No Appeals Presence Designated Circuit Riding Location Arkansas Little Rock Idaho Boise Kansas Wichita Montana Helena North Dakota Fargo Rhode Island Providence Vermont Burlington Wyoming Cheyenne Alaska Anchorage
Generally, a taxpayer does not have the right to a conference with an Appeals technical employee other than the one assigned to his or her case. In CDP cases, however, where the Appeals technical employee has had prior involvement, the case must be reassigned. See IRM 126.96.36.199.4.5 for rules about determining if the Appeals technical employee had prior involvement.
In cases where the prior involvement rule does not require transfer, the Appeals Team Manager or the Area Director of the Appeals Office, may authorize a change in assignment where the circumstances warrant.
The Appeals technical employee will refer a taxpayer directly to the Appeals Team Manager to discuss (i) any concern raised by the taxpayer about the Appeals technical employee, including the Appeals technical employee's perceived impartiality and/or (ii) a request to have the case reassigned. The request will ordinarily be considered after the taxpayer has received the Uniform Acknowledgement Letter but before a conference/hearing is conducted. If the taxpayer requests that the case be transferred during the conference/hearing process, refer the request to the Appeals Team Manager.
The Appeals Team Manager will evaluate the taxpayer's request and/or concerns and determine whether the case should be transferred to another Appeals technical mployee. The Appeals Team Manager shall communicate the decision directly to the taxpayer/representative.
IRC 7521(b)(2) requires an officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service to stop the interview whenever a taxpayer wishes to consult with a representative qualified to represent the taxpayer before the Internal Revenue Service.
Allow the taxpayer a reasonable amount of time to complete this right of consultation. In situations where the taxpayer invokes the right of consultation, document the case activity record accordingly.
If advisable, Appeals may request representatives of the Compliance, Area Director, engineering, or other experts to attend conferences.
Generally, Area Counsel is not involved in Appeals conferences but may be present in cases where Department of Justice recommends criminal prosecution and the fraud penalty is contested.
Cases and issues are to be settled on the merits. This usually involves a settlement on the merits of each issue before the court. Lump sum or blanket settlements which include tax, penalty, and interest should be avoided, and generally should not be entertained or accepted. The Service has a definite policy against settlements without statutory interest on the deficiency. Generally, in deficiency cases other than transferee liability cases, the Tax Court has no jurisdiction over interest on the deficiency and the amount of the deficiency in tax or penalty (other than the transferee liability cases) should be agreed upon without regard to the statutory interest which is to be assessed. In extraordinary circumstances, a lump sum settlement may be justified; but in such cases there must be an allocation between tax, penalty, and interest, and the interest to the agreed date of payment must be computed and omitted from the settlement stipulation.
No case is to be settled on a so-called nuisance basis, either for or against the government. What constitutes a nuisance settlement is dependent upon the circumstances in each case. When each issue is settled on its merits, the fact that the resulting deficiency is a small percentage of the deficiency asserted in the statutory notice would not be construed as a " nuisance" settlement.
The parties in a settlement stipulation can agree to eliminate or partially concede penalties to amounts less than the statutory percentage. If criminal prosecution against the petitioner (or related taxpayer involving the same transaction) has been recommended to DJ, however, coordination is required before any such agreement can be finalized. See CCDM 188.8.131.52 and 184.108.40.206 Balancing Criminal and Civil Aspects .
=========================================================================On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Legalbear <bear@...> wrote:
Fair and Impartial Settlements per Appeals Mission
- The Appeals mission is to resolve tax controversies, without litigation, on a basis which is fair and impartial to both the Government and the taxpayer and in a manner that will enhance voluntary compliance and public confidence in the integrity and efficiency of the Service. This is Appeals' general contribution towards achieving the Service mission. (See Policy Statement P–1–1.) In further support of the Service mission, Appeals may defer action on or decline to settle some cases, under Policy Statement P–8–47, where:
- required by other Headquarters Office-issued internal management documents, such as those suspending action on cases or those requiring coordination or control of identified matters with widespread impact; or
- such action would produce a greater positive effect on voluntary compliance than would be derived from settlement or other action on the case.
Bear’s note: So, we’re going to be fair and impartial unless we have an internal reason for not doing so, such as dealing with non-filers who claim they don’t owe. This is a denial of due process!
Has anybody seen Policy Statement P-8-47 or know whether non-filers and tax defyers are among the “control of identified matters with widespread impact” issues? Has anybody seen these “internal management documents”? Is there a reason these “internal management documents” wouldn’t be able via a FOIA? These are not Socratic teaching questions. I really want to know and do not know the answers to these questions. J
Phone Contact: 720-675-7230
Best times to call: 8:30 am-9:00 pm MST
Bear's Pages: www.irsterminator.com www.legalbears.com www.legalbearsblog.com
www.irslienthumper.com www.irslevythumper.com www.irs-armory.com www.freedivorceforms.net
www.cantheydothat.com (a free lien evaluation) www.trafficrocketblog.com Send an email to:
email@example.com to join Tips & Tricks for Court Group