
|
|
IMPORTANT!!!!!!!
On May 17, 2005, President Bush signed the
Tax Increase Prevention and
Reconciliation Act of 2005 .
One of the provisions provides for a
nonrefundable down payment of 20% on lump
sum offers in compromise (OIC).
If the offer is based
upon monthly installment payments, then the first
installment must be included with the OIC application, and
the monthly installments will continue during the OIC processing. The effective date for
this change was July 16.
Generally, anyone who owes significant tax to the IRS and is
unable to pay their liability in installments (over the life of
the collection statute - usually 10 years from date of
assessment) and/or through liquidation of their property, and
who is in filing compliance and current year payment compliance
(through withholding or estimated tax payments), is
eligible for the IRS OIC program. One of the key requirements
of that program is that the taxpayer MUST have filled all
delinquent tax returns (at least as far back as six (6) years
- that would include 2000 as of the time of this latest update), and be
current in 2006 with estimated tax payments (if the taxpayer
is self-employed or otherwise required to make estimated payments). The
$150 application fee is waived if (1) the 20% payment is required
with the submission of the OIC package, (2) the first monthly
installment payment is required to be submitted with the
application, (3) the OIC is based upon doubt as to liability, or
(4) the taxpayer qualifies for the "low income exception" for
the application fee.
The taxpayer
has the right to specify (in writing) how the lump sum or
installment payments are to be applied. If the taxpayer
does NOT do so, then the IRS will apply the payments to their
best advantage.
There are a number of good tax
provisions in this law - such as increasing the AMT exclusion
amount that expired at the end of 2005. I will be providing a
summary of the most significant aspects of this new legislation
on my website in the near future.
Here is a
link to a reprint from the IRS
website that discusses the new OIC rules in more depth.
Here is a
link to the IRS's frequently asked
questions concerning the new program.
|
NOTE: The
information provided in this site is NOT intended to prepare you
to file and negotiate your own Offer in Compromise (OIC).
There are sites on the web that advertise you can do your own OIC
by just using their help with the forms. These sites advertise a fee
ranging around $500-$900 for their services.
I discourage
taxpayers from trying to negotiate their own OIC. The odds
are against your success, especially if your
financial situation is the least bit complicated with ownership of real property, self-employment income, pension
accounts, community property issues, shared expenses, financial
interests in related
entities and so forth.
Filing out the forms is the easy part. It is understanding
what must be included, or what can be properly excluded
in those forms, that is critically important. Further,
your representative must understand your financial situation and
be well versed in how to prepare the cover letter that provides
the IRS with the necessary explanations and support to ensure
smooth consideration of your OIC application.
Negotiation of an
OIC can be a very challenging process. First, the employees at the IRS
are overwhelmed with the vast number OIC applications. Most
do not like handling OICs. When they see an OIC
submitted by someone without representation, as a means to get the
case closed as quickly as possible, they run the risk that the
employee may take an aggressive
and uncompromising approach. This can be successful because
the unrepresented taxpayer is typically unaware of their appeal
rights, and the specific rules under the Internal Revenue Manual
the IRS employee must follow when considering technical aspects of
the OIC financial analysis,
such as the proper treatment of "dissipated assets."
Second, to
effectively convince the Revenue
Officer, Offer Specialist, Settlement Officer or Appeals Officer that the OIC represents the "best deal
for the government," the representative who understands the
process can best present your case in a persuasive manner.
The OIC is not a
government "give-away" program. It is designed to give
taxpayers who find themselves in dire straits a sort of
"fresh start." However, an OIC will be
approved ONLY if it makes sense to the IRS from an economic
perspective. A
small percentage of the OIC's filed get approved.
Bottom line -
unless you are willing to spend a LOT of time reviewing all of the
Internal Revenue Manual provisions relating to OICs and financial
analysis, researching the protest procedures (for appealing an
adverse determination by the Service Center or a field Revenue
Officer or Offer Specialist), and dealing with numerous requests
for information and clarification, I do not recommend you go the
road alone. You can end up giving the IRS information that
they really do not need, but which can make your case very
difficult, if not impossible, to resolve.
IMPORTANT: If you are
unable to afford full representation costs but still wish to
pursue an OIC, then at least you should consider retaining a
professional on a consultant engagement to help guide you in
your preparation of the required OIC package as well as during
the tax agency's administrative review process. I offer
this service and typically have several clients at any one time
using me in a consultant capacity as they do battle with the tax
agency. Having professional guidance through this
technically complex process will significantly improve your
chance of success. |
In FY 2011, 59,000
offers-in-compromise were received by IRS (versus 57,000 for
FY 2010), and 20,000 were accepted (14,000 for the year
before). This is about 1 in 3 were ACCEPTED in 2011! |
The following was issued by the IRS in March, 2010
New Flexibility for Offers
in Compromise
For some taxpayers, an offer in
compromise –– an agreement between a taxpayer and
the IRS that settles the taxpayer’s debt for less
than the full amount owed –– continues to be a
viable option. IRS employees will now have
additional flexibility when considering offers in
compromise from taxpayers facing economic troubles,
including the recently unemployed.
Specifically, IRS employees will be
permitted to consider a taxpayer’s current income
and potential for future income when negotiating an
offer in compromise. Normally, the standard practice
is to judge an offer amount on a taxpayer’s earnings
in prior years. This new step provides greater
flexibility when considering offers in compromise
from the unemployed. The IRS may also require that a
taxpayer entering into such an offer in compromise
agree to pay more if the taxpayer’s financial
situation improves significantly.
These immediate steps are part of an
on-going effort by the IRS to ensure the
availability of the Offer in Compromise program for
taxpayers. |
|
The IRS Offer in
Compromise (abbreviated as OIC) process is a means to
potentially satisfy your tax obligations at a discount.
Although very rare, the IRS has been known to accept as little as
1% of a tax bill and call it even. There are numerous cases where
the taxpayers settled their outstanding obligation for a significantly
less amount than what was originally owed.
Is filing an
offer
in compromise right for you? Would bankruptcy (Chapter 7 where certain Federal
taxes can be discharged), or even a Chapter 13 (plan of arrangement) be a better option? The answer to the
last question depends upon a number of factors, such as:
-
Have you previously
filed bankruptcy (there are time limits on how often you can file a Chapter 7
bankruptcy)?
-
Are your taxes
dischargeable?
-
Do you have other
debts that can be discharged along with the taxes to give you a "fresh
start" ?
I advise all of my
clients who need IRS help with a tax debt that they need to discuss with a bankruptcy attorney their
options for total or partial discharge of their tax debts.
Only by fully understanding what taxes they can - or cannot - discharge
can taxpayers make a sound decision about how best to proceed.
The
changes to the bankruptcy statutes that went into effect in October 2005
make it more difficult for taxpayers to qualify today for bankruptcy than before that date - primarily because of the new "means" test.
Again, you should discuss bankruptcy as an option with a qualified
bankruptcy attorney. An attorney who I recommend is Mark Markus,
Esq. (http://www.bklaw.com).
Mark has helped some of my clients get through the bankruptcy process. For the non-discharged years,
I either negotiated an Offer in
Compromise or Installment Agreement to satisfy the remaining liability.
At the outset, I caution
you to be very
leery of any firm that promises that they can get your offer
in compromise accepted.
All any firm can really do is ensure that your offer in compromise is processable.
This means that the paperwork is complete and that your offer will be
reviewed by the IRS. There are numerous factors that the IRS
considers in determining if it is in the government's best interest to accept your
offer in compromise. The bottom line is that your offer must represent the
best deal the
IRS can hope to get. The minimum offer required is the
result of a mathematical computation I will discuss later.
I've often advised clients to
put themselves in the place of the IRS. If someone owed you the
amount you owe the IRS, and your debtor came to you with the offer
amount you are considering making to the IRS, would you be
willing to take that amount from your debtor and cancel (compromise) the remaining
balance? If so, then perhaps you do have a good basis for an offer
in compromise to present to
the IRS.
Compliance Requirements
Before
going much further in this topic, it is important to realize that the
IRS (and most State tax agencies) will NOT entertain an Offer in
Compromise if the taxpayer is not in compliance with ALL filing
requirements. That means - any unfiled returns MUST BE FILED
before you can file an OIC. Payroll returns (for business
taxpayers) generally require in addition to filing, that all deposits
have been made for the past two quarters.
Chief
Counsel has issued its opinion concerning the requirement for FULL
COMPLIANCE (filing and payment) of related entities. For
instance, a taxpayer (an individual) wants to compromise his personal
liabilities. He is the sole shareholder of his corporation.
The IRS will check on the compliance of that controlled corporation to
ensure that all returns have been filed, that all taxes have been paid,
and that all federal tax deposits for employment (or excise) taxes have
been made for the prior two quarters. If a problem exists,
the IRS can reject the OIC for failure of the related entity to be in
compliance. You can read about that Chief Counsel memorandum
here.
What
about if the taxpayer is an officer with an unrelated entity, and that
entity is not in compliance? I have found nothing specific
on this. However, the Chief Counsel memorandum appears to leave it
up to each IRS office to make its own requirements as to compliance
criteria. Remember - the right to receive an Offer in
Compromise is DISCRETIONARY. That means - the IRS has latitude to
decide whether or not to grant the OIC! The best solution is
to ensure that any related entities - as well as those for which the
taxpayer has a responsibility for filing/paying returns - is in
compliance BEFORE filing an OIC.
Processibility
You
will read above processability of the OIC. Here is an excerpt from
the Internal Revenue Manual that discusses this aspect.
5.8.3.1
(09-01-2005)
Overview
-
All offer receipts other than those based
solely upon Doubt as to Liability (DATL) are
reviewed to determine if they are
processable. No fee is due on Doubt as to
Liability (DATL) offers, including Trust
Fund Recovery Penalty (TFRP). Processable
offers are then "built" (i.e. internal and
external information is secured to verify
financial information), and perfected, if
necessary, before being assigned for
investigation. Not processable offers are
returned to taxpayers. This chapter defines
the procedures to be followed for
determining jurisdictional responsibility,
processability, and case building.
5.8.3.4
(09-01-2005)
Processability
-
Centralized Offers in Compromise (COIC)
Process Examiners (PE) are responsible for
determining processability of all offers
received and worked by the Service, except
those based solely on Doubt as to Liability
(DATL) issues. This determination must be
made within 14 calendar days of receipt of
an offer in compromise in the appropriate
COIC site.
Each new receipt will fall into one of the
following categories:
5.8.3.4.1
(09-01-2005)
Determining Processability
-
An offer in
compromise will be deemed not
processable if one or more of the
following criteria are present:
-
Taxpayer
Not in Compliance
— All tax returns for which the
taxpayer has a filing
requirement must be filed. This
rule applies even if a Service
employee previously decided not
to pursue the filing of the
return under the provisions of
Policy Statement P-5-133,
because it was believed to have
"little or no tax due" .
In-business taxpayers must have
timely deposited, filed, and
paid all required employment tax
returns for the two (2)
preceding quarters prior to
filing the offer and must be
current with federal tax
deposits for the quarter in
which the offer was submitted.
An individual taxpayer should
not be considered an in-business
taxpayer because he owns or
controls a corporation that is
not in compliance. IRM
5.8.7.6(5), Rejection, discusses
the criteria for possible
rejection of an offer from such
an individual if a related
entity is not in compliance.
Note:
Generally speaking, IRM
5.1.11.1.3(2), Delinquent
Return Program, only
requires employees to
conduct a compliance check
to confirm and document all
IMF tax returns were filed
for the preceding 6-year
period. The only exception
would be if fraud were
discovered during the course
of the investigation. Even
then it should be extremely
rare to go beyond 6 years.
IRM 5.1.11.4, Cases
Requiring Special Handling,
discusses enforcement
criteria, which states that
if the taxpayer refuses to
file, neglects to file, or
indicates an inability to
file, then the employees
should determine to what
extent enforcement should be
used (e.g. summons, 6020(b),
referral to Exam, or field,
etc.). Filing requirements
will normally be enforced
for a 6-year period, which
is calculated by starting
with the tax year that is
currently due and going back
6 years.
-
Taxpayer
in Bankruptcy
— An offer will not be
considered during a bankruptcy
proceeding. See IRM 5.8.10.2,
Bankruptcy.
Note:
IRM
25.17.4.7,
Offers-in-Compromise and
Bankruptcy (09–01–2004) ,
states that "administrative
and legal problems would be
created if a tax liability
was simultaneously the
subject of a
court-supervised bankruptcy
case and the administrative
offer-in-compromise
process." Therefore, it is
the policy of IRS that an
offer will not be considered
if a taxpayer is in
bankruptcy.
Offer materials including
financial information should
be forwarded to the
Insolvency unit assigned to
the bankruptcy.
-
Taxpayer did not submit the
application fee with the offer
— The application
fee of $186 or the , Income Certification for
Offer in Compromise Application
Fee, must be submitted with each
Form 656. No application fee is
required for offers filed solely
on the basis of Doubt as to
Liability (DATL).
Note:
The Form 656-A applies only
to individual taxpayers.
-
No
deviations from or additions to
processability criteria may be made
without written authorization from the
Headquarters Office.
-
An offer
cannot be returned for the sole reason
that the cost of an investigation may
exceed the amount offered.
Recent Policy Change
IMPORTANT: The IRS changed its guidelines in November 2004 to
begin allowing installment agreements over the life of the collection
statute (generally, the statute for COLLECTION expires 10 years from the date the tax is assessed).
Consequently, the IRS will reject offers where the taxpayer is
able to pay off their liability (with accruing interest...) over the
remaining statutory period for collection.
For
example, let's use a taxpayer who has a liability of $50,000 resulting
from delinquent returns he just filed. If the average interest rate
was 5% per year, the total liability plus interest (assuming 120 equal
payments) would be about $62,500. That would require monthly
payments of around $525 for 10 years (ouch). If the taxpayer has
sufficient disposable income (discussed later) to make that
monthly payment, the
IRS will NOT accept an offer.
The net realizable value
of any
assets will be considered as reducing the amount that has to be
satisfied by payments, meaning that the required monthly payment amount would be
less. For instance, assume the same liability of $50,000, and net equity
in a car of $12,500 (yielding a net realizable value at 80% of $10,000).
Subtracting $10,000 from the $50,000 owed would leave $40,000 to be paid
over 10 years. Assuming a 5% interest average, that would require
payments of about $420 a month. If after applying the national and
local standards you are deemed capable of making that payment, you will
NOT get an approved OIC.
Previously, the maximum installment payment period the IRS allowed was
generally 60 months. The result of this change to permit
installment payments for the life of the
collection statute is to deny many taxpayers the ability to compromise
their liability.
OIC
Application Fee - $186
Beginning on January 1, 2014,
all taxpayers who file an
OIC must include an application fee of $186.00 (previously, $150) with their submission
- unless (1) the offer is based solely on doubt as to liability,
or (2) the taxpayer’s total monthly income falls at or below income
levels based on the Department of Health and Human Services poverty
guidelines. The Form 656 has a section for attesting to qualifying
for the exception to the filing fee.
IMPORTANT!
Before getting too deep in the mechanics of an offer, you may want to
read a response from the Commissioner to Congress regarding the
Congressional inquiry into the Offer program. This response
provides a very good insight into the offer program, its history,
current acceptance figures, and other data that will help you determine
if an OIC is right for you. There is also a great discussion
regarding the newer form of Offer - "ETA" - effective tax administration.
The document is a Word document, so if you do NOT have Word or a reader
that can read .DOC files, do not try to down load it.
Click
here to read this
document.
This
is the text of a recently issued Policy Statement by the IRS dealing
with Offers in Compromise:
|
IRS Policy Statement P-5-100
|
|
-
Offers will be
accepted: The Service will accept an offer in compromise
when it is unlikely that the tax liability can be
collected in full and the amount offered reasonably
reflects collection potential. An offer in compromise is a
legitimate alternative to declaring a case currently not
collectible or to a protracted installment agreement. The
goal is to achieve collection of what is potentially
collectible at the earliest possible time and at the least
cost to the Government.
-
In cases where
an offer in compromise appears to be a viable solution to
a tax delinquency, the Service employee assigned the case
will discuss the compromise alternative with the taxpayer
and, when necessary, assist in preparing the required
forms. The taxpayer will be responsible for initiating the
first specific proposal for compromise.
-
The success of
the compromise program will be assured only if taxpayers
make adequate compromise proposals consistent with their
ability to pay and the Service makes prompt and reasonable
decisions. Taxpayers are expected to provide reasonable
documentation to verify their ability to pay. The ultimate
goal is a compromise which is in the best interest of both
the taxpayer and the Service. Acceptance of an adequate
offer will also result in creating for the taxpayer an
expectation of and a fresh start toward compliance with
all future filing and payment requirements.
|
|
|
There are a couple of important facets you should understand regarding
your offer payment and its eligibility for refund if your offer is NOT
accepted.
1. If
you file an
offer in compromise, but it is NOT processable - meaning:
a. Your are currently in bankruptcy, or
b. You have not filed all required tax returns (including current
year estimated taxes), or
c.
You have a business with employees AND you are NOT
current with deposits for the current
quarter or any of the two prior quarters,
then, the $186 fee will be returned with the Offer application.
2. If your offer in
compromise is accepted for
processing, and the IRS requests documents/information, but you do NOT fully comply with the request, the IRS will most likely reject
the offer - and the IRS will KEEP the $186 fee. If
you decide to resubmit another Offer in Compromise at a later date, you
are required to pay another $186.
Offer
Requirements
The IRS will consider
and accept an
Offer if you meet just one of the following three conditions:
-
Doubt as to
Liability - Doubt exists that the assessed tax is correct.
-
Doubt as to
Collectibility - Doubt exists that you could ever pay the full
amount of tax owed.
-
Effective Tax
Administration - There is no doubt the tax is correct and no doubt
the amount owed could be collected, but an exceptional circumstance
exists. This could be a serious economic hardship or that full payment would be
unfair and inequitable. An Offer based upon
Effective Tax Administration is often best used where there are
significant medical/health problems for the taxpayer or his/her
dependents.
This latter category
was added in 1998. Here is a
link to the
IRS Notice that describes the intent and purpose for this new type of
offer. I have also included a Section from the Internal Revenue
Manual that discusses this newest category of offer. Please view
it here.
Please understand that
you have no legal
right to have your valid tax bill reduced by the IRS.
Whether or not they accept your offer in compromise is entirely a
matter of governmental discretion. This is why it is important to
have your offer professionally prepared and presented to maximize its potential
for acceptance. The IRS must be convinced that acceptance of your offer is
in their
best interest. A small percentage (less than 20%) of filed offers are being accepted
based on the recent statistics of the IRS.
Submitting an offer in compromise to the IRS is a very formal
process. You start by
completing the most recent version of IRS Form 656. You need to be very careful in completing
the form - and to be sure to attach all of the required documents -
including any explanations that may be required to clarify any of your
responses!
In addition to Form
656, you must submit a Collection Information Statement on Form 433-A(OIC). If you are married and reside in a community property state (like
California), the IRS usually requests that your Collection
Information Statement include data pertaining to your spouse -- even if you
alone owe the IRS.
The IRS scrutinizes the disclosures you make in this form 433-A much more
closely when considering an OIC than when you request to pay your taxes
with an installment agreement.
Submitting an
offer in compromise
will suspend the normal running of the 10-year Statute of Limitation on
Collection for the period the Offer is under consideration, and for an
additional thirty (30) days if you receive a notice of rejection.
If you or your representative files an appeal within the allowed 30 day period following notice of
rejection, the collection statute continues to be suspended until
conclusion of the appeal - plus another 30 days.
Certainly an option
for dealing with old tax liabilities (generally, those over three years old)
is bankruptcy - although the new bankruptcy legislation (that went into
effect October 17, 2005) will limit or remove that option for many
taxpayer. There are pros and cons to filing bankruptcy.
If you owe taxes for tax periods that were filed over three years ago, I
strongly suggest that you consult with an Attorney who is well versed in
bankruptcy law to determine the discharageability of any portion or all
of the tax liability
you owe. In fact, because of special rules that apply to
Chapter 13 bankruptcies, I still recommend that ANYONE who owes back
taxes consult with a bankruptcy attorney first.
Before getting into
the technical discussion of an offer in compromise, I am sure you are aware that there are
many individuals and companies advertising on the Internet that will complete and
submit your offer in compromise. Be alert that some of these
individuals and firms may not be willing - or
lack the authority - to actually represent you before the IRS.
Further, you may be tempted to download the forms from the Internet
(www.irs.gov) and complete them yourself. Downloading and
studying the forms is
a good idea as it will help you understand the OIC process. However, I
do NOT recommend you try to do your own offer in compromise. You
may create more tax issues for yourself as a result of not fully
understanding what should - and should not - be included on the
financial statement and how best to
present the information.
ACCEPTED OFFERS
If
your offer is accepted, you MUST remain in full compliance (that means
timely filing returns and paying taxes, including estimated tax if you
are required to do so) for five (5) years. It is like being
on probation. If you miss just one (1) requirement, the IRS
can revoke the OIC and reinstate the original liability less payments
made pursuant to the offer.
Here
is a recent court case on this subject:
IRS's administrative determination to
terminate taxpayer's OIC, reinstate full amount due less payments
made, and proceed with lien filing for same was upheld: although
taxpayer had paid compromised amount, his failure to timely pay 1 of
ensuing years' liabilities (“late year”) violated OIC's plain terms
and as such allowed IRS to terminate same and proceed with full
collection. Also, although taxpayer had eventually fully paid that
late year's tax, and did so before IRS issued lien notice, IRS's
actions were still justified since taxpayer had paid late in
material breach of OIC; and there was no “excuse of condition.” And,
fact that IRS failed to consider taxpayer's intervening request to
pay that late year via installments didn't change result since,
although IRS could have entertained installment
proposal, it had no obligation to do so in face of taxpayer's OIC
default. (Will K. Ng v. Commissioner, (2007) TC Memo 2007-8
General Concepts
According to the IRS,
the amount of an offer in compromise based upon doubt as to collectibility must be equal to the
net realizable value
of your assets plus the amount of money the IRS could take from your
future income. For this example, I will assume there is no way you
can pay off your large liability by monthly payment for the length of
the collection statute. So, you meet the basic qualification of an
OIC. How much do you have to offer in that circumstance?
By
illustration,
if the net realizable value of your assets (a car,
for example) are worth $7,200 (their fair market value TIMES 80%, less what you owe),
plus cash and investments at their face value, and
the IRS determines that you can pay by way of monthly installments over
12 months (the # of months used in the formula when making a "cash
offer" as opposed to an "installment offer") future
income totaling $6000, your minimum offer must
be equal to or more than $13,200.
Net Realizable
value of your assets. The net realizable value of your assets is
the amount the IRS would likely collect if they levied (seized) your assets and sold them
today -- after paying off any debts associated with the property, such
as a mortgage or other secured loan balance. To figure out the value of your assets without actually
selling your property, you're entitled to use the quick sale value, or QSV, generally considered 20% less than the fair market value.
Future income.
Your future income is first determined by subtracting your necessary
living expenses (NOTE: there are
National Standards that
specify the maximum amounts that
are allowable for the computation of housing and utilities expenses,
living expenses, transportation expenses and out-of-pocket
medical expenses) from your total monthly income.
In specific (and limited) circumstances, the Internal Revenue Manual
allows the Service employee to deviate from the standards). This
resulting amount (future income) represents the least amount you
would be required to pay if you were granted an installment agreement to
make monthly payments on your tax bill.
Other expenses.
I am often asked about the impact of pre-existing State tax installment
agreements. Previously, the IRS has never allowed state installment
agreement amounts - or even credit card payments. Now, they have
relaxed their position by allowed state tax installment agreements
entered into before the IRS OIC application) and minimum credit card
payments.
After
you determine this monthly payment amount, you then multiply it by a
number that is related to the type of payment plan you chose:
-
Cash Offer
-- The multiplier is 12 if you propose to pay the amount of your
Offer in one cash payment within 90 days of being notified that your
offer in compromise has been accepted (this is the IRS's preferred method of
offer payment)
-
Short-Term
Deferred Offer -- The multiplier is 24 if you propose to pay
the amount of your Offer over two years (the IRS's second choice),
or
If
the IRS accepts your offer in compromise and you will make payments over two years, the IRS may record a Notice of Federal Tax Lien showing
your tax debt, if it hasn't already done so. The lien will stay on
your records until the offer is fully paid or the statute of
limitations for collection has expired, whichever occurs first.
Let me illustrate some
important aspects of submitting an offer in compromise:
You need to understand your financial situation
This is critical
because to the extent that you have assets in excess of liabilities, the
IRS is not likely to accept an offer in compromise that is less than the net
realizable value of your assets plus future income. However, how
you present your "numbers" can make a big difference.
To illustrate, assume you believe that you have a net equity of $75,000
in your home. If you record that amount on your financial
statement, you can expect the IRS to argue that your offer amount must be at
least $75,000 (this assumes you have no other assets or liabilities).
A skilled representative may be able, through
persuasive argument and evidence, to convince the IRS to reduce that equity
value by other factors, thereby reducing the offer amount accordingly.
You need a representative with skill and experience in offer
preparation
-
You need advice on
how to value your assets and liabilities. As mentioned above,
knowing how to calculate and present your net equity in your home
- as well as your other assets - can have significant financial consequences.
-
Your representative
must advise you how to calculate your current and future income and
expenses, as well as how to properly apply the National Standards.
-
Your representative
can best determine the least amount of an offer that the IRS will
likely accept.
-
Your
representative will be able to guide you, based upon your personal
situation, in determining if an Offer based upon Effective Tax
Administration would have a better chance of success than one based
upon Doubt as to Collectibility.
Your representative
must be effective in negotiating acceptance of your offer in compromise:
-
Understanding the tax law and IRS internal procedures, including the
Internal Revenue Manual
-
Knowing how to
effectively argue the facts in your case and the law
-
Having credibility
with the IRS is very important:
-
Having earned the respect of IRS employees
-
Anticipating how the
IRS employees will evaluate your financial situation
-
Understanding
the numerous IRS procedures and policies
-
Knowing the
limits of IRS discretion in Collection and Appeals
-
Will not be
intimidated by an aggressive IRS Offer Specialist, or by an Appeals
Officer or
Settlement Officer
Your representative
must know when the time is right to request a hearing in the Appeal's
Division
-
Understanding the
importance of timing and basis for an appeal
-
Knowing the Appeals'
procedures
-
Presenting your
case persuasively before the Settlement Officer or Appeals Officer
-
Being familiar with
the discretion that an Appeals Officer/ Settlement Officer has, as well as their Team
Manager
For most taxpayers, dealing with
the IRS can be
an intimidating experience. The IRS employee may take advantage of
- or become frustrated with - a taxpayer who
represents himself, or of their representative if that person lacks
experience.
With my extensive and respected IRS background,
I know the rules they must play by. I will ensure that each of my
clients get full and appropriate consideration of their offer in
compromise.
Hiring any
qualified
representative to help you develop and process an OIC can be expensive.
Why? Because offer in compromise preparation and processing is a very
tedious and time consuming process. It takes time to
accurately complete the application and financial statements.
Further, your representative likely will be required to attend several meetings with IRS employees before it is over.
Because of the IRS workload, most offer in compromise applications take over a year to complete their processing.
If the offer is rejected by an Offer Specialist, then further time will
be required for the
appeal.
It is important to
understand that retaining an advocate solely on a basis of their lower
price could end up costing you
thousands of dollars in the end because they were unable to get your
offer accepted, or accepted for the lowest possible amount.
If your offer in compromise is rejected, you may end up in worse financial shape than before because
you are out the money you spent for the OIC process.
Remember the discussion above on how to
present the equity in your home? The point I was making is that
the competency of your advocate
is the key to successful negotiation of an Offer for the least amount
required for acceptance.
For
your information, there are certain
assets that you do NOT have to count in evaluating your financial
situation. Here are the rules
relating to property exempt from inclusion in an offer in compromise (for preparation
of Form 433A). Section 6344 of the Internal Revenue Code
lists “Property Exempt from Levy.” This same property is exempt
from valuation in an Offer-in-Compromise:
1. Wearing apparel and school books “necessary" for the taxpayer
or for members of his family (section 6344(a)(1)). Luxury items
such as furs are not necessary and are, therefore, not exempt.
Section 301.6334-1 of the regulations.
2. Fuel, provisions, furniture, and personal effects in the taxpayer’s
household and of the arms for personal use, livestock, and poultry of
the taxpayer, as does not exceed $6,250 in value (section 6334(a)(2)).
3. Books and tools necessary for the trade, business, or profession of
the taxpayer as do not exceed in the aggregate $3,125 (section
6334(a)(3).
4. Unemployment compensation (section 6334(a)(4)).
5. Undelivered mail (section 6334(a)(5)).
6. Railroad Retirement Act annuity and pension payments (section
6334(a)(6).
7. Workmen’s compensation (section 6334(a)(7)).
8. Judgments for support of minor children (section 6334(a)(8)).
9. Exempt income (section 6334(a)(9)). Exempt income, as defined
in section 6334(d) pertains, in general, to the sum of the standard
deduction plus the personal exemptions allowed, divided by the monthly
pay period. For details of the computation, see section 301.6334-3
of the regulations.
Finally, an offer
in compromise rejected by the Appeals Office can be appealed to the United States Tax
Court. However, unless it can be shown that the Appeals Officer or
Settlement Officer
abused his or her discretion in rejecting the offer, it is unlikely that
the decision of Appeals will be overturned. To illustrate this,
following is a synopsis of a 2003 Tax Court review of an IRS
administrative determination.
The IRS's
administrative determination to proceed with collection of pro se [he
represented himself] taxpayer's unpaid tax liabilities was upheld.
The Appeals Officer did not abuse her discretion by rejecting
taxpayer's original offer in compromise where she adopted revenue
officer's conclusion that, based upon financial information provided
by taxpayer, the amount the taxpayer offered was insufficient in
comparison to amount that he could really afford to pay in compromise.
Further, the
proposed levy was necessary to induce payment and wasn't unreasonable
based upon taxpayer's long history of tax delinquency. Also, no
evidence suggested that rejection of taxpayer's amended offer was
abuse of discretion.
(Randall G. Van
Vlaenderen v. Commissioner, (2003) TC Memo 2003-346, 2003
Appealing the Decision of Appeals to the Court
A
decision by Appeals that is adverse to the taxpayer may be appealed to
the Court under the guise that the IRS is guilty of "abuse of
discretion." This is a very difficult case to win.
Here is an excerpt from such a case to give you an idea of what the
Court considers in these kinds of trials:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
FIFTH CIRCUIT,
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Western District of Texas (3:03-CV-478-FM)
Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART,
Circuit Judges.
Judge: PER
CURIAM:
*
Plaintiff-Appellant Alicia
Siquieros (“Taxpayer”) appeals the district court's denial of her motion
for summary judgment and grant of the motion for summary judgment of the
Defendant-Appellee United States of America (“the government”),
dismissing Taxpayer's lawsuit seeking judicial review of the Notice of
Determination issued by the Internal Revenue Service (“I.R.S.”). We
affirm.
The gravamen of Taxpayer's
complaint is that the I.R.S. abused its discretion in refusing to accept
her $100 offer to compromise her federal tax liability arising from the
Trust Fund Recovery Penalty assessed by the I.R.S. against Taxpayer as a
“responsible party” for employment taxes withheld from employees of E.C.
Trucking, Inc. but not paid over to the government by that corporation
(which sought protection in bankruptcy and is no longer in business).
Taxpayer is deemed a responsible party by virtue of her position of
employment with E.C. Trucking, Inc. at the times in question.
Like the district court, we
are bound to apply the highly deferential abuse of discretion standard
to the decisions of the I.R.S. complained of by the Taxpayer. In so doing, we have carefully considered the
record on appeal (which demonstrates, as confirmed by the parties'
cross-motions for summary judgment, that there are no genuinely disputed
issues of material fact) and the issues of law presented and argued in
the appellate briefs of the parties, observing the extensive exhaustion
of administrative remedies by Taxpayer, through the appellate process,
including the offers and counteroffers of settlement by the parties.
It is immaterial whether we
or the district court might have exercised our discretion differently
and either accepted one of the settlement proposals from Taxpayer or
extended counteroffers that Taxpayer might have deemed more lenient. Our
review is limited to determining whether, under all the circumstances of
the case—including factors favorable to Taxpayer's position, such as
age, health, financial condition, and lack of factual culpability—the
I.R.S. abused its discretion in rejecting the compromise offers of
Taxpayer or in making its own counteroffers. Our thorough review of the
facts and applicable law under this highly deferential standard of
review convinces us that, as a matter of law, the I.R.S. cannot be held
to have abused its discretion. Consequently, we affirm the district
court's grant of summary judgment dismissing Taxpayer's action.
* * * * * * * * * *
Do
I qualify for an OIC?
After reading the above, if
you feel that filing an OIC may be the best solution for you, I need to determine if you
meet the basic qualifications. Here is a
link to the form to complete and
submit. Please be sure to answer all questions - and double check
the accuracy of your E-mail address to ensure that I can respond back to you.
Does
the IRS have to give you an OIC even if your offer is GREATER than what
the agency computes is the maximum they can collect? The
answer is NO!
You could spend a lot of
money on an OIC and still not be granted one. The IRS must make a
decision concerning whether or not it is in the best interest of the
Government to write-off a portion of your liability in exchange for a
payment now (or on payment terms). The IRS will take into
consideration your earning potential, time remaining on the statute of
limitation, your compliance history, medical history and other factors.
Read the following excerpt:
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Code Section 6330—Collection due process—review of administrative
determination—offer-in-compromise.
IRS's administrative
collection determination to reject taxpayer's OIC and place part of her
unpaid liabilities in “currently not collectible” status was upheld:
although taxpayer's offer actually exceeded by 10-fold amount IRS had
estimated as her collection potential, IRS's determination to reject
same was in accord with Internal Revenue Manual's best interests of
govt. provision and reflected no abuse of discretion.
Factors playing
into IRS's determination included that taxpayer had history of
non-compliance; that her circumstances might change in near future,
before collection periods expired; and that she had several more years
of earning capacity through public relations firm that was run from her
home and had relatively low overhead.
Taxpayer's argument that IRS was
required to accept offer just because of amounts involved and fact that
her full debt was non-collectible was misguided. (Leslie B. Bennett v.
Commissioner, (2008) TC Memo 2008-251)
Here is a 2011
Tax Court case synopsis that addressed an OIC proposal in a Collection
Due Process Hearing. It addresses the issue of "dissipated assets" - a
scenario where a taxpayer sells or disposes of assets within the
proximity of the filing of an Offer In Compromise - and the
proceeds/funds are NOT used to pay basic living expenses:
Code Section 6330—Collection due process—review of
administrative determination—offer-in-compromise—reasonable
collection potential—computations—dissipated assets—hearings.
IRS's supplemental/remanded administrative
determination to proceed with collection and reject OIC that
international investment firm owner/tribal member submitted
based on doubt-as-to-collectibility was upheld. IRS's
determination reflected no abuse of discretion when considering
that taxpayer, in letter to IRS stating he could no longer make
payments consistent with original offer amount and that he was
proposing reduced amount, effectively amended or withdrew
original offer as of stated date such that IRS could not have
accepted same.
And while his proposal to pay
reduced amount was another offer or collection alternative to be
considered at hearing, IRS's rejection of same was ultimately
appropriate because taxpayer was proposing to pay nothing more
than proceeds from single asset sale that totalled less than his
RCP, as computed by including dissipated assets/liquidated
investments.
Argument that liquidated
investments shouldn't be counted because taxpayer was using them
to pay his salary and thereby necessary living expenses failed
for lack of proof that he actually used funds for such purposes.
Moreover, findings that he had additional funds in bank accounts
and future disposable income also showed his offer to be
unacceptable/below RCP. And fact that his firm went defunct
didn't change result when considering he was still “very
employable.”
Also, arguments that
settlement officer repeatedly reneged on agreements to accept
earlier offers or that protracted 4-year long CDP hearing was
unduly intrusive were meritless, particularly when considering
that officer had no authority to bind IRS regarding stated
offers and that hearing's protraction was largely of taxpayer's
own making.
(Stephen J. Johnson v. Commissioner, 136 TC
No. 23 ) |
State of
California Tax Agencies OIC Update
Continuing their efforts to
make more services accessible and convenient for more taxpayers,
California’s three tax agencies have simplified the Offer In Compromise
application process. A single application for all three tax agencies is
now available!
The Board of Equalization
(BOE), Employment Development Department (EDD) and Franchise Tax Board
(FTB) have developed a single form, the DE 999CA, Multi-Agency Form for
Offer in Compromise that individuals can use for any of the state’s tax
agencies.
The individual agencies must
still negotiate each offer in compromise separately for their respective
taxes. For example, only the FTB can negotiate a state income tax
liability where the Board of Equalization can only negotiate a sales or
use tax liability.
The form is available online
at the California Tax Service Center (www.taxes.ca.gov),
as well as at each of the three tax departments’ Websites (BOE www.boe.ca.gov,
EDD www.edd.ca.gov,
FTB www.ftb.ca.gov).
Update: State Board
of Equalization
SBE, effective 3/1/2011,
revised its OIC procedures as follows:
The State Board of
Equalization (SBE) has reissued its guidance on offers in
compromise (OIC). The SBE's OIC program provides a payment
alternative for individuals and businesses who cannot pay their
tax or fee liability in full. Offers in compromise are
considered for liabilities of a transferred or discontinued
business, or a taxpayer that no longer is in control or
associated with the transferred or discontinued business (or a
similar type of business). Effective January 1, 2009 through
January 1, 2013, the SBE will also consider an OIC for open and
active businesses that have not received reimbursement for
taxes, fees, and surcharges; successors of businesses that may
have inherited tax liabilities from their predecessors; and
consumers, who are not required to hold a seller's permit, but
incurred a use tax liability. ( California SBE Information
Publication 56, 03/01/2011 .) |
NOTES ON THE IRS COLLECTION FINANCIAL STATEMENT
(FORM 433-A)
A key document used in the
OIC evaluation (as well as for installment agreements) in the Form
433-A(OIC). This multi-page form asks all sort of questions that are
designed to give the IRS a basis for determining the taxpayer's net
worth and future income potential. Often, there are
disagreements over what expenses the taxpayer should be allowed to
offset their gross income. There are standards (national,
regional and local) used for housing, living, out-of-pocket medical and transportation
expenses. But, how about for other expenses (such as life
insurance, taxes, medical costs, delinquent state and local taxes,
etc.)?
The Internal Revenue Manual
(IRM for short) provides guidance to Revenue Officers on what to allow
and in what amount. In my experience, the Service employees
are not aware of this section, have forgotten about it, or are simply
ignoring it. Having a representative who understands the
rules and who can be persuasive in encouraging a Service employee to
follow them is important in the success of getting the least amount of
offer (or installment payment) agreement.
To illustrate, below is a
reprint from the IRM dealing with allowances for other expenses.
5.15.1.10 (10-02-2012)
Other Expenses
-
Other expenses may be
Necessary or Conditional. Other Necessary
expenses meet the necessary expense test and
normally are allowed. The amount allowed
must be reasonable considering the
taxpayer's individual facts and
circumstances. Other Conditional Expenses
may not
meet the necessary expense test, but may be
allowable based on the circumstances of an
individual case.
-
There may be circumstances
where expenses may be allowed even if they
do not meet the necessary expense test. If
the IRS tax liability including accruals can
be paid within six years and within the CSED,
all expenses may be allowed if they are
reasonable. If the taxpayer cannot pay
within six years, it may be appropriate to
allow the taxpayer up to one year in order
to modify or eliminate one or more expenses.
See IRM 5.15.1.2,
Analyzing Financial
Information.
-
If other conditional
expenses are determined to be necessary and,
therefore allowable, document the reasons
for the decision in your history.
-
Delinquent State and Local
Taxes. Payments for delinquent state and
local (county or municipal) tax liabilities
may be allowed in certain circumstances:
-
When a taxpayer owes
both delinquent Federal taxes and
delinquent state or local taxes, and
does not have the ability to full
pay.
-
When a taxpayer is
cooperative and provides complete
financial information.
-
When a taxpayer
advises the IRS that he/she owes
delinquent state or local taxes and
provides verification of the state
or local tax liability, and
agreement, if applicable.
-
Follow the
procedures in this table to
determine the allowable payment for
delinquent state or local tax debts.
-
Follow these
procedures to calculate an allowable
payment amount for delinquent state
or local tax debts.
1) Determine net disposable income
on Form 433-A,
Collection Information Statement
for Wage Earners or Self-Employed
Individuals, or Form
433-F,
Collection Information Statement.
Do not include any amount that is
being paid for outstanding state or
local tax liabilities in the
calculation. Net disposable income
is the difference between gross
income and allowable living
expenses.
Note:
If the
taxpayer's net disposable income
is less than $25, the account
should be reported Currently Not
Collectible due to hardship.
2) Calculate the dollar amounts for
the IRS and state or local payments
based on the total liability owed to
each agency (including penalties and
interest to date).
3) Use the net disposable income and
a percentage of IRS and state or
local liabilities to total liability
to calculate the payment amounts.
Note:
If the Net
disposable income is less than
$25, the account should be
reported CNC - hardship.
-
If allowing even a
minimal monthly payment for
delinquent state or local taxes will
result in an IRS monthly payment
amount of less than $25 and the
account being reported Currently Not
Collectible due to hardship:
Example:
The taxpayer’s
net disposable income (not
including the state or local
payment) is $70. The state or
local payment due on an existing
agreement that was established
prior to the earliest IRS date
of assessment is $100. The
amount allowed for delinquent
state or local taxes on the CIS
is $45. The payment for the IRS
IA is $25. Advise the taxpayer
that he or she can use the
Miscellaneous allowance to pay
the difference between what the
IRS has allowed ($45) and what
is owed monthly for the state or
local payment agreement ($100),
which is $55 ($100 - $45 = $55).
One month after the date the
state or local agreement will be
fully paid at $45 monthly,
increase the IRS’ IA amount to
$70 monthly ($25 + $45).
Note:
Document all
calculations in the case
history.
-
Allowing payments
for delinquent state or local taxes
when establishing an Installment
Agreement has no effect on lien or
levy priorities. This guidance only
impacts determinations of ability to
pay. Employees should use existing
procedures and lien law to determine
the IRS interest in assets. If a
taxpayer refuses to establish an
Installment Agreement or defaults on
an Installment Agreement, IRS
employees should follow existing
procedures and lien law to determine
the appropriate course of action,
including pursuing collection.
-
Minimal payments for
delinquent state or local taxes are
allowed for Installment Agreements
using the six-year rule. If the
six-year rule applies, taxpayers are
required to provide financial
information, but do not have to
provide substantiation of reasonable
expenses. If the taxpayer meets all
other requirements for the six-year
rule, the amount claimed for state
or local taxes may be allowed.
Employees would not be required to
obtain verification of the state
payment or calculate an amount due
based on the percentage basis
discussed above.
-
If a state already
has a Federal/State Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) for establishing
joint Federal and State agreements,
follow the MOU guidelines.
Offers - State of California
The State of CA
Franchise Tax Board has
developed a rather
distinctive Offer in
Compromise program. In
recent years, the
Franchise Tax Board's
acceptance of offers has
increased dramatically
and appears now to
roughly parallel the
federal acceptance rate.
Turn-around time at the
Franchise Tax Board is
more rapid. This can
create complications if
the taxpayer submitting
an offer to both the
federal and state
agencies. The state
agency, with its one
offer group, works on a
more intuitive basis. In
cases where there is a
possibility of changed
circumstances and full
payment, the state
counteroffer is likely
to be the amount of tax
due (compromising the
penalties and interest).
This policy has been
codified. If the
taxpayer makes the case
that he cannot pay the
full amount, the
Franchise Tax Board will
review the offer
emphasizing fairness in
a less rigid context
than the IRS.
It is the Franchise Tax
Board's policy generally
not to pursue collection
while an Offer in
Compromise is in
progress. However,
collection efforts are
not stayed by law while
the offer is being
processed as is the case
federally.
If the taxpayer wants to
settle with both
California and the IRS
and lists all assets at
full value on both
offers, he will end up
paying twice their value
when settling with both
agencies. The state is
much more amenable to
taking an offer at less
than full asset value
when a federal liability
is involved, as long as
the state is receiving
an amount equal to the
proportionate obligation
(if the state obligation
is one-third of the
federal, the offer
should be one-third of
the federal)
One possibility is to
raise enough cash to
make a deposit with the
state of its
proportionate share of
the offer funds
available. This deposit
will then be excluded
from the assets
available for the
federal offer.
Unfortunately, with the
state processing offers
more rapidly than the
federal, the taxpayer is
left with the dilemma of
whether to accept the
state offer before
knowing whether a
federal offer will be
successful. However, the
state has been extremely
patient while waiting
for the IRS
determination.
The financial statements
sought by the Franchise
Tax Board in many
respects parallel that
sought by the Internal
Revenue Service. It is
the monthly income and
expense analysis where
the Franchise Tax Board
tends to depart from the
federal offer format.
While the focus of the
federal offer is on
gross income, the state
offer looks to net
income.
The Franchise Tax Board
asks for both the gross
and net income from
businesses and rentals.
Strangely, the Franchise
Tax Board generally does not ask
for backup data for the
business and rental
income other than bank
statements.
The Franchise Tax Board
also asks for a
three-year income
summary, which allows
the Franchise Tax Board
to compare gross income
reported by the taxpayer
to that on filed
returns. These issues
arise in fairly few
offers and the Franchise
Tax Board may find it
easier to deal with
businesses and rentals
on a case-by-case basis.
It is the expense side
that differs
significantly from the
federal offer and
frequently results in a
somewhat different
analysis. Their policy
is to allow all
reasonable expenses that
are actually being paid.
This may include
tithing, college for the
kids, and payments on
credit card debt. The
Franchise Tax Board does
not use the national
standard expense, and
does not cap housing and
auto expense.
The Franchise Tax Board
requires a separate
breakout of grocery,
auto insurance,
gasoline, estimated tax
payments, and payments
on delinquent taxes.
This itemization makes
the state form a much
harder form to complete.
However, as in the case
of the federal offer,
the larger the gap
between income and
expense, the larger the
amount that will have to
be offered. Because of
the multiplier, it is
important that the gap
between income and
expense be narrowed as
much as possible.
In the best of
circumstances, the
taxpayer will keep the
monthly budget
electronically and will
be able to account for
all expenses by merely
printing out a profit
and loss statement on
Quicken or a similar
software program. If
not, the taxpayer should
compile a list of all
expenses from the
taxpayer's checkbook
records. Unless the
taxpayer has savings
from which to draw or
receives help from
friends or family, all
expenses, whether
necessary or not, should
be listed.
As with every aspect of
preparing the offer, the
expense statement should
be as complete as
possible. If there is
any question on an item,
the taxpayer should
include the item and let
the professional
determine which items
are appropriate and how
much supporting material
should be included. Most
preparers have software
programs that allow him
to enter the information
the taxpayer supplies to
create a finished
product.
The taxpayer is asked to
describe why the offer
is fair and where the
offer funds are coming
from. The IRS does not
seek an explanation why
the offer is fair, but
preparing a response is
a good exercise, since
the strongest argument
the taxpayer has is that
the offer is fair (not
something that the
taxpayer is entitled
to). The state will also
seek a copy of the
Internal Revenue Service
Offer in Compromise (but
not the attachments) and
a state Power of
Attorney.
The federal and state
offers, if both are
appropriate, should be
prepared simultaneously.
Many of the materials
and much of the thought
process are similar.
|
|
|