Forest S. Whitaker; Keisha Whitaker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOREST S. WHITAKER; KEISHA
WHITAKER,
Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent-Appellee.
No. 16-73450
Tax Ct. No. 18639-15L
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from a Decision of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted September 26, 2017**
Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Forest S. Whitaker and Keisha Whitaker appeal from the Tax Court’s
summary judgment allowing the Commissioner of Internal Revenue
(“Commissioner”) to proceed with its collection action for the Whitakers’ federal
income tax liability for tax year 2013. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
OCT 4 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-73450
§ 7482(a)(1). We review de novo. Miller v. Comm’r, 310 F.3d 640, 642 (9th Cir.
2002). We affirm.
Because the Tax Court properly determined that the Settlement Officer did
not abuse his discretion in rejecting the Whitakers’ request for an installment
agreement, the Tax Court properly granted summary judgment for the
Commissioner. See 26 U.S.C. § 6159; 26 C.F.R. § 301.6159-1(b)(1)(i) (IRS
Settlement Officer has discretion to accept or reject any proposed installment
plan); see also 26 U.S.C. § 6330(c)(3) (Settlement Officer must decide “whether
any proposed collection action balances the need for the efficient collection of
taxes with the legitimate concern of the person that any collection action be no
more intrusive than necessary.”).
We reject as without merit the Whitakers’ contention that the IRS Office of
Appeals was biased.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --