In Uncategorized on 05/09/2022 at 18:54

Having exhaustively defined it, Judge Alina I (“AIM”) Marshall finds that Christian Renee Evert, T. C. Memo. 2022-48, filed 5/89/22, couldn’t prove she was under it. The AO, also a Navy vet (O-6), SSA hearing officer, practicing lawyer, FBI Agent, and finally made it to Independent Appeals, only gave her Publication 1035. Judge AIM extensively quotes same.

Chris, a “licensed nurse in New York,” claims the AO coerced her into signing the Form 872, extending the SOL.

“The parties agree that petitioner timely filed her return for [year at issue] and that the three-year limitations period provided for under section 6501(a), without extension, would have expired before the date on which respondent mailed the notice of deficiency for [year at issue]. Thus, petitioner has made the requisite prima facie showing. Respondent has introduced a Form 872 signed by petitioner…valid on its face, which extended the period of limitations…. Therefore, respondent has discharged his burden of going forward.” T. C. Memo. 2022-46, at p. 6.

But Chris claims duress.

“We have also held that ‘actions that deprive another of her freedom of will are distinguishable from legally authorized actions that merely limit another to choose between options that are not desirable.’ Hall v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2013-93, at *12. Hence, it is not duress when the Commissioner makes statements informing a taxpayer that lawful means to assess and collect the tax will be used. Accordingly, we have held that a taxpayer did not sign a consent under duress when the Commissioner told the taxpayer that an opportunity for an IRS Appeals conference would not be allowed if the taxpayer failed to sign a consent. (reasoning that it was not duress for the revenue agent to inform the taxpayer that a notice of deficiency would be issued without an opportunity for administrative appeal because such statements were nothing more than notice that the Commissioner intended to use lawful means at his disposal to assess the tax); (explaining that the Commissioner’s refusal to conduct an IRS Appeals conference without the taxpayers’ execution of Form 872 was a necessary step in the Commissioner’s pursuit of the lawful means provided for income tax assessment because holding an IRS Appeals conference without extending the period of limitations would have caused the Commissioner to issue an untimely notice of deficiency).” T. C. Memo. 2022-46, at p. 7 (Citations omitted; for the story of the late Blonde Grayson Hall, see my blogpost “When All Else Fails,” 4/4/13.)

Judge AIM buys the AO’s testimony, not Chris’.

I note Chris was represented by the Syracuse University LITC, and thank the University for their commitment.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: