CCA 1302028: Notice of determination remained valid despite an incorrect representative address

Plain-English summary

Chief Counsel Advice considered whether a collection due process notice of determination was valid when the taxpayers received it at their correct last-known address, but the representative's copy was sent to an incorrect address listed on a Form 2848. The advice concludes that the notice was valid because it was a written determination that collection could proceed and was sent by certified mail to the taxpayers' last-known address. It explains that the representative's failure to receive a courtesy copy did not invalidate the notice or extend the 30-day period for filing a Tax Court petition under section 6330(d)(1). Appeals therefore could not rescind or withdraw the notice.

Ruling snapshot

• Question: Does an incorrect address for the representative invalidate a collection due process notice of determination?
• Outcome: Advice given. The notice remained valid.
• Key authorities: IRC § 6330(d)(1); Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 159 (2001); Weber v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 258 (2004); McDonald v. Commissioner, 76 T.C. 750 (1981); IRM 8.22.9.15.

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2012100315360646 Number: 201302028
Release Date: 1/11/2013
Office: ----------------------------
UILC: 6330.00-00

From: ------------------
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 3:36:07 PM
To: ------------------
Cc: --------------------------
Subject: FW: CDP - POA - Non-receipt of Notice

Hi ------------

This is to follow up on our telephone conversation concerning the validity of the notice of determination. It
is our understanding that the Forms 2848 submitted by the husband and wife taxpayers list different
addresses for the representative, and only one of those addresses was correct. Each of the Forms 2848
stated on line 7 that the original notices and other written communications would be sent to the taxpayer
and a copy of the notices and other written communications would be sent to the representative. The
settlement officer conducting the taxpayers' CDP hearing sent all correspondence, including the
conference letter, to the taxpayers at their correct (and last known) address with copies to the
representative at the incorrect address provided on one of the Forms 2848. The representative has said
that he did not receive copies of the conference letter or other correspondence sent by the settlement
officer. The representative said that he received calls from the settlement officer and returned them. The
settlement officer stated that the representative never returned her calls. Appeals issued a notice of
determination sustaining the collection action and sent it to the taxpayers by certified mail to the taxpayers'
last known address with a copy to the representative at the incorrect address. The 30-day
period for filing a petition with the Tax Court pursuant to section 6330(d)(1) has expired. The
representative has requested that the notice of determination be rescinded and the hearing resumed.

The notice of determination in this case is valid. The Tax Court has held that a valid notice of
determination for section 6330(d)(1) jurisdictional purposes must be "a written notice that embodies a
determination to proceed with collection of the taxes in issue." Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 159,
164 (2001). In determining its jurisdiction, the court will not look behind a notice of determination to
inquire about whether the taxpayer was given a hearing satisfying the requirements of section 6330. Id.
at 162-164. The Tax Court has also concluded that a notice of determination is valid if it was sent by
certified or registered mail to the taxpayer's last known address. Weber v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 258,
261-262 (2004). The notice of determination in this case was a written notice of Appeals' determination
that the collection of the taxes in issue may proceed. It was sent by certified mail to the taxpayers' last
known address. The failure to send a copy of the notice of determination to the representative's correct
address does not invalidate the notice of determination. Cf. McDonald v. Commissioner, 76 T.C. 750,
753 (1981) (explaining that the Service sends copies of notices of deficiency to representatives as a
matter of courtesy and that failure to send such a copy does not affect the validity of the notice of
deficiency). The notice of determination issued in this case is valid and would have provided a basis for
Tax Court jurisdiction if the taxpayers had filed a petition within the 30-day period specified in section
6330(d)(1).

As I indicated on the phone, Appeals cannot rescind or withdraw a notice of determination (see IRM
8.22.9.15).

If you have any further questions or if I can be of further assistance, please give me a call.

Thanks,

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------