Leshin v. Commissioner , 436 F. App'x 791 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             JUN 07 2011
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    ROBERT LESHIN; VIENNA LESHIN,                    No. 09-70399
    Petitioners - Appellants,         Tax Ct. No. 17709-06L
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
    REVENUE,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from a Decision of the
    United States Tax Court
    Submitted May 24, 2011 **
    Before:        PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    Robert and Vienna Leshin appeal from the Tax Court’s decision after a trial
    upholding the IRS Office of Appeals’ determination sustaining a tax lien for their
    unpaid federal income taxes for 2001, and rejecting their offer-in-compromise for
    income tax liabilities from 1999 through 2004. We have jurisdiction under 26
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    U.S.C. § 7482(a). On appeal from the Tax Court, we review for an abuse of
    discretion the Office of Appeals’ decision whether to accept an offer-in-
    compromise and for clear error the factual findings. Keller v. Comm’r, 
    568 F.3d 710
    , 716 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.
    The Office of Appeals did not clearly err in its factual findings underlying
    the calculation of the Leshins’ reasonable collection potential, which exceeded the
    Leshins’ offer-in-compromise. Accordingly, the Office of Appeals did not abuse
    its discretion by rejecting the offer. See 
    id. at 717-18
     (no abuse of discretion in
    rejecting taxpayers’ offer-in-compromise where reasonable collection potential
    exceeded offer). Although the Office of Appeals made mistakes in calculating the
    Leshins’ necessary living expenses, the mistakes were harmless because the
    Commissioner of Internal Revenue corrected the mistakes in the Tax Court and
    showed that, with the corrections, the Leshins’ offer was still far below their
    reasonable collection potential. See 
    id. at 718
    .
    The Leshins’ remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
    We do not consider documents that were not part of the record before the
    Office of Appeals. See 
    id.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                      09-70399
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-70399

Citation Numbers: 436 F. App'x 791

Judges: Paez, Pregerson, Thomas

Filed Date: 6/7/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023