Taxpayers Have the Right to Appeal an IRS Decision

NSTPInternal Revenue Service (IRS), Tax Court Cases, Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TBOR)

Taxpayers have the right to appeal an IRS decision

Taxpayers have the right to appeal an IRS decision A taxpayer might at some point see the IRS make a decision about their taxes. If the taxpayer disagrees with this decision, they have the right to appeal it. The right to appeal an IRS decision in an independent forum is one of 10 basic rights known collectively as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Here are some facts taxpayers should know about the right to appeal an IRS decision: Taxpayers have the right to a fair administrative appeal of most IRS decisions. There is an independent office called the IRS Office of Appeals. This office is separate from the IRS office that first reviewed the case. Generally, the Office of Appeals will not discuss a case with the IRS. Taxpayers also have the right to receive the Office of Appeals’ decision in writing. Taxpayers generally have the right to take their cases to court. Your Appeal Rights and How to Prepare a Protest if You Don't Agree is a publication that explains how a taxpayer can appeal a tax case when they disagree with the IRS’s findings. If the IRS sends a notice proposing that the taxpayer owes more money, the … Read More

COMMUNICATIONS WITH UNENROLLED RETURN PREPARERS IN TAX COURT CASES

NSTPTax Court Cases, Unenrolled Return Preparers

COMMUNICATIONS WITH UNENROLLED RETURN PREPARERS IN TAX COURT CASES Chief Counsel Notice 2017-007 sets out a series of instructions as to how Counsel attorneys should interact with unenrolled return preparers. Under both Rev. Proc. 2014-42 and Rev. Proc. 81-38, unenrolled return preparers are not permitted to represent a taxpayer before Counsel. An unenrolled return preparer is not an authorized representative, even if the unenrolled return preparer has obtained the necessary Annual Filing Season Program (AFSP) Records of Completion. Therefore, the unenrolled return preparer may not act as taxpayer’s representative before Counsel. The AFSP – Record of Completion allows the unenrolled preparer to represent their clients in a correspondence audit, when interacting with the Taxpayer Advocate Service or at a Taxpayer Assistance Center. The tax return preparer must participate in the AFSP in both the year that the return was prepared and the year in which the notice was received. However, if the involvement of an unenrolled return preparer is beneficial to the resolution of the case, Counsel attorneys may work with the unenrolled return preparer, in a non-representative capacity, to develop the facts of a case. For example, the unenrolled return preparer might provide records substantiating items reported on a return or otherwise provide information … Read More

COMPANY LIABLE FOR PAYROLL TAXES AFTER PEO FAILS TO PAY THE EMPLOYMENT TAXES

NSTP6205(a)(1), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Tax Court Cases

COMPANY LIABLE FOR PAYROLL TAXES AFTER PEO FAILS TO PAY THE EMPLOYMENT TAXES

COMPANY LIABLE FOR PAYROLL TAXES AFTER PEO FAILS TO PAY THE EMPLOYMENT TAXES In Legal Advice Issued by Field Attorneys (LAFA), IRS has concluded that a taxpayer was on the hook for the employment taxes that were left unpaid by a professional employee organization (PEO). The taxpayer, not the PEO, was in control of the payment of wages to the individuals that worked in its business. Additionally, relief under Section 530 of the Revenue Act of ’78 did not apply because that provision deals only with controversies involving employment status of workers. However, the taxpayer was entitled to interest-free adjustments for underpayments under Code Sec. 6205(a)(1), to correct its “error” in relying on a PEO to pay its workers’ payroll taxes. In the operation of its limousine transportation business, the taxpayer employed workers to perform services in its accounting, administrative, marketing and sales departments. It also employed reservationists, fleet technicians, dispatchers, meeting and conference personnel, and chauffeurs. The taxpayer did not claim any deductions for officer compensation or salaries and wages. Instead, it claimed deductions for “Employee Leasing” for its entire workforce. During the undisclosed tax years at issue, the taxpayer entered into agreements with a series of PEOs. Each … Read More