Madeleine L’Engle’s 1962 young adult classic once again figures at Appeals in a CDP, but unlike Jacob & Marsha Rozbruch, who starred in my blogpost “A Wrinkle in Time,” 2/3/23, wanting Appeals to consider only long-past info and leave out what was found on remand, Manntej Sra & Jasmine Sra, Docket No. 5919-24L, filed 6/10/25 claim Appeals abused discretion by not considering events occurring after CDP concluded and NITL confirmed.

Man & Jas say they sold assets and paid down some of the tax due (which they admit was due) after the CDP, the AO miscalculated the QSV of their principal residence and never gave them a chance to refinance or make an unforced sale. Selling more assets would only give them more tax liability and cause economic hardship.

But Man & Jas were behind on their 1040-ESs at the CDP.

They are Golsenized to 9 Cir, which is strict record-rule territory. What was brought forth at the CDP and made it into the administrative record is “all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know,” as a much greater writer than I put it.

Judge Cary Douglas (“C-Doug”) Pugh has this one.

“But regardless of whether SO B’s calculations were correct petitioners were not eligible for an installment agreement at the time of SO B’s determination because they failed to make the requisite quarterly estimated tax payments as required under section 6654(c)(2). Rejecting their offer was not an abuse of discretion therefore and we need not consider SO B’s calculation of the QSV or petitioners’ other alleged challenges to her review.” Order, at p. 5. (Name omitted).

At a CDP, make sure you’re current and play every card you’ve got. That’s your trial.