The 1913 Zo Elliott and Stoddard King classic is the story of  William C. Thompson, 2013 T. C. Memo. 260, filed 11/14/13, and STJ Daniel A. (“Yuda”) Guy trudges down every step of said long, long trail.

Willie C. didn’t bother filing returns for three years in the 90s; promptly, IRS gave him some SFRs, and then a SNOD around the turn of the millennium.  Willie C. never bothered to petition the SNOD, so IRS assessed and sent Willie C. a 3172 NFTL, filing the lien notice in Texas.

Four years later, IRS sent Willie C. another 3172, and filed liens in Oregon.

Willie C. never asked for a CDP for any of this.

However, “The Texas NFTL and the Oregon NFTL stated in pertinent part: ‘With respect to each assessment below [a reference to the assessments listed by the Court in the table above], unless notice of lien is refiled by the date in column (e) [May 17, 2010], this notice shall constitute the certificate of release of lien as defined in IRC 6325(a).’” 2013 T. C. Memo. 260, at p. 3 (Footnote omitted).

Three years later IRS made another assessment, this time of additions to the taxes previously assessed, and Willie C. finally files a petition two years after that. IRS moves to dismiss, claiming they never sent Willie C. a NOD as to their proposed levy. Willie C. goes to Ninth Circuit, where IRS finds they did in fact issue a NOD, but Willie C. is too late, and Ninth Circuit affirms on alternative grounds. But SOL is tolled while all this is going on.

Meanwhile back at the Texas and Oregon depots, IRS’ filed liens have lapsed, as IRS failed to renew within the thirty days after year ten; see Sec. 6323(g)(3)(A). So IRS invokes Section 6325(f)(2), the “oops!” clause, by filing “…Form 12474(A), Revocation of Certificate of Release of Federal Tax Lien, which stated in pertinent part: ‘I certify that we mistakenly allowed a Notice of Federal Tax Lien filed against * * * [petitioner] to operate as a Certificate of Release. I declare that the automatic release of the Notice of Federal Tax Lien is revoked and that the lien is reinstated as provided under Internal Revenue Code Section 6325(f)(2).’” 2013 T. C. Memo. 260, at pp. 5-6.

Apparently IRS filed these all around Oregon, but missed Texas.

So IRS sends off a fresh NFTL to Oregon’s Secretary of State, but Willie C. demands a CDP even before IRS sends him the CDP Notice.

But what can Willie C. bring up at the CDP? Appeals claims nothing, as he’s about seven years too late. And anyway the Appeals letter isn’t a NOD, so he can’t petition it.

Well, STJ Yuda says the Appeals letter is a NOD, but Willie C. can only have a CDP as to the second assessment. The Appeals letter is not a NOD as to the original NFTLs, because Willie’s chance to appeal and petition is long since gone.

But it is a NOD as to the additions to tax and the NFTLs filed in that respect.

STJ Yuda sums it all up: “To recapitulate, we hold that the Court lacks jurisdiction insofar as the petition seeks to challenge the tax, additions to tax, and interest that respondent assessed in April 2000. To that end, we will dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and strike so much of the petition as refers to those items. On the other hand, the Court has jurisdiction in this case insofar as the petition seeks review of the assessments entered against petitioner in October 2008. To provide for the orderly review and disposition of that matter, we will remand the case to the Appeals Office to conduct an administrative hearing and to issue a supplemental notice of determination.” 2013 T. C. Memo. 260, at p. 17.

The long, long trail goes on a-windin’.