Paul M. Daugerdas, Docket No. 7350-20L, filed 10/9/24, is back, still broke and fighting IRS’ NFTL and NITL for the multi-hundred million in criminal restitution USDCSDNY handed him. For the backstory, see my blogpost “Restitution Meets Destitution,” 1/10/22.*

Appeals muddled the supplemental CDP, issuing two (count ’em, two) NODs, one sustaining the levy and the other rejecting it. Judge Goeke is positively kind to Appeals, given that the SO misrepresented facts to OCC. Transcript, at p. 12.

Howbeit, OCC’s response to the SO’s request for guidance contains almost no factual analysis and provides almost no advice of a factual nature. Transcript, at p.13.

Paul wants summary J, and he goes one for three. The NFTL protects the fisc in case Paul strikes it rich, despite his presently alleged indigency.

The levy goes down, because all IRS is seeking is to grab the house Paul deeded to his spouse before he went down in USDCSDNY. Judge Goeke teaches IRS a lesson in nominee liens. If IRS claims that the spouse is a mere nominee because Paul runs the whole show, it’s basically a rerun of the voidable transaction rules: transfer for little or no consideration, possibility of heavy-duty liabilities of transferor, close relationship of transferor-transferee, and unrecorded conveyance (but recordation counts for little, because the parties can easily manipulate that).

OK, suppose Paul and spouse check all the boxes. Judge Goeke says to IRS, serve spouse with NITL; serving Paul with an NITL serves no purpose, as he is not in title. Go duke it out with spouse, who deserves a chance to assert whatever rights she may have.

As for Paul’s desire for an IA that tracks the USDCSDNY restitution payout order, IRS isn’t bound by the USDCSDNY order. Moreover, in this case all Paul has is Social Security, and there’s no evidence in the record of his living expenses, so there’s nothing on which to base an installment payout.

* https://taishofflaw.com/2022/01/10/restitution-meets-destitution/