I need court cases which challenged the Administrative Discretionary authority of the IRS.
I need a court case which ordered the IRS to collect taxes.
This deals with the IRS Whistleblower Program under 26 USC 7623(b). I have given the IRS specific information of delinquent taxpayers. The IRS has refused to investigate any identified corporation or individual. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue says he is using his discretional authority not to investigate. I believe this is an abuse of discretion and need case law to back it up. In order to make a decision not to collect taxes, the IRS must first make a determination of the taxes due, without an investigation the CIR is abusing his authority.
Please indicate the court cases which apply and the Internal Revenue Regulations which apply. If possible the Comments of Congress in passing the 2006 law dealing with the IRS Whistleblower problem.
Congress says the IRS must collect taxes 26 USC § 6201.
ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION. The exercise of professional expertise and judgment, as opposed to strict adherence to regulations or statutes, in making a decision or performing official acts or duties. A discretionary action is informal and, therefore, unprotected by the safeguards inherent in formal procedure.ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION
The exercise of professional expertise and judgment, as opposed to strict adherence to regulations or statutes, in making a decision or performing official acts or duties.
A discretionary action is informal and, therefore, unprotected by the safeguards inherent in formal procedure. A public official, for example, has administrative discretion when he or she has the freedom to make a choice among potential courses of action. abuse of discretion is the failure to exercise reasonable judgment or discretion. It might provide a cause of action for an unconstitutional invasion of rights protected by the due process clause of the Constitution
Goldberg v. Kelly—In this 1970
Jump up ^ Kahng, L. (2013). The IRS Teas Party Controversy and Administrative Discretion. Cornell Law Review Online, 9941A. Retrieved from: http://cornelllawreview.org/clronline/the-irs-tea-party-controversy-and-administrative-discretion/5 U.S. Code § 706 - Scope of review
Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
• US Code
• Authorities (CFR)
prev | next
Scope of review
To the extent necessary to decision and when presented, the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and determine the meaning or applicability of the terms of an agency action. The reviewing court shall—
compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed; and
(2) hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be—
arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law;
contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity;
in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right;
without observance of procedure required by law;
unsupported by substantial evidence in a case subject to sections 556 and 557 of this title
or otherwise reviewed on the record of an agency hearing provided by statute; or
unwarranted by the facts to the extent that the facts are subject to trial de novo
by the reviewing court.
In making the foregoing determinations, the court shall review the whole record or those parts of it cited by a party, and due account shall be taken of the rule of prejudicial error.Administrative Discretion". West's Encyclopedia of American Law. 2005. Retrieved 21 April 2015.26 U.S. Code § 6672 - Failure to collect and pay over tax, or attempt to evade or defeat taxUnder §551(1), with exceptions not here applicable, the APA applies to each “agency” of the federal government. Treasury and the IRS are clearly within the act’s definition of “agency.” In Mayo Foundation for Medical Education & Research v. United States,***** 704, 713 (2011), the Supreme Court stated that, absent a contextually relevant justification, the Court was “not inclined to carve out an approach to administrative review good for tax only. To the contrary, we have expressly recognized the importance of maintaining a uniform approach to judicial review of administrative action.” The walls of the citadel of tax parochialism have crumbled.2 Effective representation
of clients in controversies with the IRS requires the lawyer to be able to bring general administrative law principles to bear.