Beverly S. Patriot
Dahlonega, Georgia 30305

Date: April 6, 2007

Internal Revenue Service
Appeals Office
401 West Peachtree Street, NW
Stop 1100-D, Room 1455
Atlanta, GA 30308-3510
Attn: L. M. Allen / ID: 58-10229
Ref: AP:FE:ATL:LMA, Collection Due Process - Levy, SS: 123-45-6789
Tax Period: 1993

Dear M. Allen:

This letter is my acknowledgment that I received your letter on April 4, 2007 concerning the Collection Due Process (CDP) Hearing in your Atlanta Appeals Office on May 1, 2007. In response to your letter, I do not wish to have a telephone conference, nor do I wish to discuss this matter via correspondence since the majority of my questions pertaining to the matter have gone unanswered.

I requested a face-to-face hearing as I am entitled to under the law. The things I will discuss include collection alternatives, including OIC and payment schedule, procedural irregularities, and spousal relief. Please send me the necessary forms, including the financial statement form.

What I am requesting is an in-person meeting as prescribed by law. IRC Section 6330 (b) states:

“Right to a fair hearing

(1) In general

if the person requests a hearing under subsection (a)(3)(B), such hearing shall be held by the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals.”

Nowhere in Section 6330 is there a provision for a telephone conference or correspondence by mail. The law is very clear that “such hearing shall be held by the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals.” So I will reiterate my demand for a right to a fair hearing as prescribed by law.

At the hearing, I intend to raise any relevant issue relating to the unpaid tax or the proposed levy, including “challenges to the appropriateness of collection actions”; and “offers of collection alternatives” as set forth in Section 6330(c)(2). At the hearing I will raise all issues provided for in IRC Section 6630(c)(2) as follows:

(2) Issues at hearing

(A) In general

The person may raise at the hearing any relevant issue relating to the unpaid tax or the proposed levy, including -

(i) appropriate spousal defenses;

(ii) challenges to the appropriateness of collection actions; and

(iii) offers of collection alternatives, which may include the posting of a bond, the substitution of other assets, an installment agreement, or an offer-in-compromise.

(B) Underlying liability

The person may also raise at the hearing challenges to the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability for any tax period if the person did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute such tax liability.

Other issues at hearing:

1. Whether the IRS met all the requirements of any applicable law or administrative procedure under due process of contacting the tax person.
2. The form 668-Y(c) Notice of Federal Tax Lien, as I am in disagreement with the Lien,
3. The law requires the IRS to notify taxpayer at least 30 days before initiating any Levy action to give taxpayer an opportunity to formally appeal the proposed levy.
4. Statue of Limitation Issues concerning the taxpayer in question 1993.

1. Please schedule the hearing in Atlanta, Georgia, and notify me of the date, time and place, seeing that I have met the requirements by Congress for hearing.
2. Please confirm that my face-to-face conference will be with an Appeals Officer and not a Settlement Officer.
3. Please provide a copy of all information, documentation and the administrative records you have on me before the CDP Hearing. Please send me Form 4340 with the transcripts and certificate. This is necessary for my CDPH.
4. At the hearing I will bring a tape recorder or court reporter, a representative and witnesses. Please contact security and make arrangements for me to bring my tape recorder, etc., through the security check point.

1. In your letter, you stated that the issues I raised in my CDP request are those that are frivolous for Appeals, and could you please explain why they are in detail because I have in the past have asked the questions, but they were unanswered, and the tax period that is in question goes back to 1993 - 14 years.
2. In your letter, you stated I would be allowed a face-to-face conference on any nonfrivolous issue in writing or calling within 14 days of your letter. I would like that face-to-face conference to be held in Atlanta. Georgia, and I have explained in this letter the issues that will be raised that will not exclude me from the face-to-face conference. Please explain to me in detail why you are saying I will not be allowed a face-to-face conference.
3. Your letter accuses me of taking positions that I have not, and nothing in my CDPH request is or has been deemed frivolous. Nor did I bring up any “moral, religious, political, constitutional, conscientious or similar grounds” as you stated in your letter. You need to reread my CDPH request. I hereby withdrawal any arguments, if any, that the IRS has deemed frivolous or groundless.

Sincerely,

____________________________
Beverly S. Patriot