1.4.28  Appeals Managers Procedures

Manual Transmittal

November 13, 2014

Purpose

(1) This revises IRM 1.4.28, Organization, Finance, and Management, Resource Guide for Managers, Appeals Managers Procedures.

Material Changes

(1) Editorial update to IRM 1.4.28.3.1.1 to reflect new Appeals Team Manager requirement to contact the area technical advisor with details of ex parte communication breaches.

Effect on Other Documents

This supersedes IRM 1.4.28 dated November 20, 2013.

Audience

Appeals Managers

Effective Date

(11-13-2014)


John Cardone
Director, Policy, Quality and Case Support

1.4.28.1  (11-20-2013)
Appeals' Mission, Organizational Structure, Vision and Core Values

  1. For a complete discussion on the Appeals Mission and Organizational Structure, refer to IRM 1.1.7,Organization and Staffing, Appeals. The Vision of Appeals is to promote an independent and innovative environment that drives quality and timely resolution of tax disputes by empowering a highly skilled, motivated and cohesive workforce.

  2. The Core Values of Appeals are:

    • Independence

    • Professionalism

    • Collaboration

    • Resourcefulness

1.4.28.2  (10-01-2012)
Management Engagement (GME)

  1. Management Engagement is a concept of active, personal, directional involvement by Area Directors and Appeals Team Managers (ATMs). Focusing on directional involvement and accountability positively impacts customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction and business results. Managers are expected to motivate their employees and establish a positive work climate where the approach is one of engagement and commitment with a focus on improvement in operational measures. The emphasis needs to be on the positive: what we can do, what we will do, and why it’s important. The expectation is that Appeals managers will:

    1. Engage the workforce in achieving IRS and Appeals goals, objectives and modernization vision

    2. Take ownership of the workload, data bases and other systems

    3. Develop their employees

  2. Management engagement requires a high level of emphasis on the concept of ownership of work at each organizational level. Frequent and direct communication is critical. The expectation is that managers will communicate the organizational policies and objectives in the context of the employees’ day-to-day actions. Engagement and commitment are necessary at all management levels, to achieve continuous improvement in customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction and business results. The concept of ownership of the work applies to operations and programs. The Executive and management levels address this guideline as follows:

    Field Operating Executive
    Business reviews and direction
    Guidance from program analysts
    Customer outreach - internal and external stakeholders
    Monitoring business results and resources
    Area Director
    Operational reviews and direction
    Customer outreach - internal and external stakeholders
    Monitoring business results and taking actions to improve
    Monitoring resources and actively addressing imbalances
    Appeals Team Manager
    Interactions with employees
    Team meetings, training and workshops
    Review and feedback on live and closed cases
    Customer outreach - internal and external stakeholders
    Addressing performance issues promptly
  3. What is ownership? The concept of ownership includes commitment to doing the best possible job and performing every act so as to consistently achieve the correct results or appropriate action. The Area Director and the ATM are the critical links between the Service’s broader goals and the operational objectives and measures. Management "ownership" requires consideration of what is important to all taxpayers and balances operational efficiency with the achievement of high quality results. Taxpayers seeking their appeal rights are interested in resolving their dispute on a timely basis with courtesy and in receiving the "correct" application of the tax law. The rest of the taxpaying public is generally concerned with safeguarding the public trust concerning the protection and conservation of their tax dollars and rights through operational efficiency and accuracy.

  4. A significant aspect of employee development is fostering the attitude and expectation that all employees, including managers, take personal ownership in continual development and for becoming experts in their area of responsibility. There are many internal resources available, including SkillSoft courses, IVTs, and specialized formal training. Area Directors and ATMs must plan actions to ensure all employees are availed of these resources. Informal training, such as presentations by Counsel or specialists, or assigning employees to make presentations on technical issues at team meetings, provides benefits at minimum cost. ATMs are responsible for ensuring employees can work the full range of issues at their grade level and that they stay current and proficient as changes occur. While the nature of the receipts can present a challenge in providing sufficient variety of work, whenever feasible, employees are assigned developmental at-grade work.

1.4.28.2.1  (10-01-2012)
GME Concept - Compliance with Program Objectives and Policies

  1. Obtaining and ensuring a high level of compliance with program objectives and policies through communication, review, and follow-up on:

    • Program and Case Decisions

    • Workload Management

    • Performance and Commitments

  2. The Executive and Management levels address this as follows:

    Operating Unit Executive
    National business reviews
    Town Hall meetings
    Management conference calls
    Office visitations
    Monitoring achievement of performance and commitment goals
    Analysis and evaluation of programs
    Area Director
    Continuing personal involvement in program and workload management
    Operational Reviews
    Monitoring achievement of performance and commitment goals
    Reviews of open and closed cases
    Management conference calls
    Town Hall meetings
    Analysis and evaluation of programs and statistical data
    Appeals Team Managers
    Priority reviews
    Live case reviews
    Workload reviews
    Closed case reviews
    Conference observations
    Analysis and evaluation of monthly statistical data

1.4.28.2.1.1  (08-16-2013)
GME Concept - Inquiry Procedures

  1. The GME concept requires acceptance of responsibility for your actions and decisions regarding the achievement of our overall goals and objectives and to balance the needs of all of our customers. Inquiry procedures include:

    • Analysis of Case Management Activity

    • Performance Documentation and Feedback

    • Quality Measurement Results

  2. The Area Director needs to inquire how effectively managers are carrying out their responsibilities for ownership of the work by seeing that managers are:

    Area Director
    Fully engaging their employees in the work
    Utilizing their time efficiently
    Monitoring the quality of decisions and quality of cases
    Monitoring the timeliness of case resolution
    Utilizing resources effectively
    Ensuring taxpayer privacy
    Making correct decisions
  3. To ascertain the level of engagement, the Area Director needs to monitor the quality of work and the work climate. This can be accomplished by

    1. Appraising the efficiency of the office with the aid of statistical data – Monthly ACDS, AdHoc reports, and AQMS results (Business, Results, Quality)

    2. First hand knowledge through appropriate operational and ad hoc reviews

    3. Reviewing performance documentation at the team and individual level

    4. Feedback from practitioners and taxpayers (Customer satisfaction survey)

    5. Analyzing employee satisfaction survey and workgroup meeting results

    6. Observing the attitude of employees carrying out work assignments

    7. Observing the ability of managers and employees

  4. The GME concept requires the Appeals Team Manager (ATM) to accept responsibility for his or her actions in meeting the goals and objectives of the organization and to balance the needs of all our customers. The ATM needs to inquire how effectively Appeals Officers (AOs) and Settlement Officers (SOs) are carrying out their responsibilities. This is accomplished by:

    Appeals Team Manager
    Timely involvement at the decision making stage
    Intervening in cases where value can be added
    Determining where to concentrate their time and effort
    Providing open and frank feedback to their AO/SOs
    Conducting an appropriate analysis of case decisions and inventory management activity
    Observing conferences
  5. Appeals Team Managers are expected to maintain direct knowledge of cases within their team. Also, with ownership the ATM is a stakeholder in the work product. To ensure a high quality work product the ATM needs to be knowledgeable and involved in cases up front. This is accomplished by conducting live case reviews, workload reviews, conference observations, and closed case reviews to:

    1. Evaluate if the case is being properly handled before the decision is made

    2. Evaluate if effective inventory management practices are being followed

    3. Evaluate if the time span and time applied are appropriate

    4. Determine if the settlement obtained was appropriate – was the law correctly applied

    5. Evaluate whether the AO/SO was objective

    6. Obtaining and utilizing feedback from AQMS for trends of case quality

1.4.28.2.1.1.1  (08-16-2013)
GME Concept - Policy & Guidance

  1. This component of GME addresses policy and guidance as it flows from Headquarters through the Area Director to the ATM. IRS' Performance Management System (PMS) contracts define responsibilities. Operating Unit Directors provide guidance in specific program areas. Service policies, such as NTEU National Agreement provisions, are emphasized at each of the management levels. Policy and Guidance includes:

    • Clearly defined roles and responsibilities

    • NTEU National Agreement provisions

    • Strategic program guidance

  2. The Appeals Strategic/Program Plan provides strategic program direction. Area Directors and ATMs have a stake in the ownership of program direction and guidance contained in the Appeals Strategic/Program Plans, and are charged with delivering on the objectives through execution of all necessary actions.

1.4.28.3  (08-16-2013)
Assignment and Control of Work

  1. Appeals managers are responsible for the control of work units from the time the unit comes into the office until it goes out of the office.

  2. Statistical reports which are produced monthly and quarterly, summarize information on receipts, disposals, inventory, overage units, etc., provide a means of controlling work on an overall basis.

  3. Account and Processing Support (APS) is the control center for the returns in inventory. See IRM 8.20, Account and Processing Support (APS), for instructions for maintaining a uniform records and reporting system on Appeals operations.

1.4.28.3.1  (11-20-2013)
Assignment of Work Units and Issuance of Letter 4141(CG), Uniform Acknowledgment Letter (UAL)

  1. The Appeals Team Manager (ATM) is responsible for promptly assigning the work units and generating and issuing the Letter 4141(CG), Uniform Acknowledgement Letter, or an approved Uniform Acknowledgment Letter substitute (collectively referred to as the UAL). At the time of assignment, the ATM determines:

    1. The grade of the work unit,

    2. Whether the associated group of cases received from Account and Processing Support (APS) constitutes a proper package of cases for inclusion as an Appeals work unit, and

    3. Whether cases involve an Appeals Coordinated Issue or a tax shelter

      Note:

      Compare the date stamped on the transmittal memorandum from Collection or Examination and the date you are considering the units for assignment to indicate whether work units were unduly delayed in being made available for assignment.

  2. The ATM must make every attempt to generate and issue the UAL in the shortest time possible.

    1. For non-docketed cases, no later than 30 days from when the case is received in Appeals.

      Note:

      The 30 days is a maximum time frame which includes time for mailing cases between campus locations and field offices before the ATM receives the case.

    2. For docketed cases and TEFRA cases, at the same time the case is assigned.

      Note:

      Docketed cases are first sent to Counsel to answer the petition and then returned to Appeals for assignment of the case after answer; therefore, it may not be possible to assign the case and issue the UAL within 30 days from receipt of the case in Appeals.

  3. The ATM or their delegate:

    1. Assigns the case on the Appeals Centralized Database System (ACDS),

    2. Generates the UAL under the ATM's signature,

    3. Issues the UAL and selected enclosures to the taxpayer (and Power of Attorney, if applicable), indicating on the letter that a copy was sent to the POA, or, in a docketed case, issues the UAL and selected enclosures to the attorney of record, if any, and

    4. Retains a copy of the dated UAL for the administrative file.

    Note:

    Exceptions for generating and issuing the UAL apply only when stated in official documents dated and issued after October 5, 2006. The ATM may designate his or her UAL duties as long as the letter is generated under the signature of the ATM. Appropriate measures should also be taken to ensure the UAL is issued to the Power of Attorney on record at the time the UAL is issued.

  4. The ATM must use the ACDS, APGolf Forms/Letters Generator "report letter" option to create the UAL. When the ACDS, APGolf Forms/Letters Generator is used to prepare the letter:

    1. The current date is recorded in the "ACKLTR" field on ACDS to show the date the letter is generated for tracking purposes, and

    2. The CARATS sub-action code CO-UAL and information about the UAL will automatically generate an entry on the case activity record. The entry information includes the date the UAL is generated, the UAL letter number/name, name and address of who the letter is sent to including the power of attorney, and the number/name of the enclosure(s) selected and printed as enclosures on the face of the UAL when the letter is generated from a key case (time sheet) record.

    3. When the letter is generated from a non-timesheet case, the employee must manually make a CAR entry regarding the issuance of the UAL. The employee will use CARATS action/sub-action code CO-OT on the time sheet (key case) record and include the following information about the UAL: date the UAL was generated/mailed; UAL letter number/name; name and address of to whom the letter was sent, including the Power of Attorney or attorney of record in a docketed case if any; and, number/name of the enclosure(s) selected and printed as enclosures on the face of the UAL.

  5. These UAL procedures do not apply to the following types of cases:

    1. Collection Appeals Program (CAP)

    2. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

    3. Separate Timeliness Determination (CDPTD)

    4. Cases carded in with feature code DP that are not of the case type DPLV, DPLN, or DPL2. Most often these are Offer in Compromise (OIC), Innocent Spouse (IS), Abatement of Interest (ABINT), or liability cases related to a CDP case.

    5. Offer in Compromise (OIC) cases carded in with feature code DO for potential defaults.

    6. Type I cases with an SD or EQ feature code.

    7. Collection Due Process (CDP) cases carded in with feature code "PY" and Loc 7 field code "RRAP" .

  6. The Uniform Acknowledgement letter is not required by statute. Therefore, the sending of this letter or an approved substitute is not governed by RRA, PL 105-206, section 3201(d), which requires duplicate correspondence to joint filers at the same address.

  7. Letter 4141(CG), Acknowledgment Letter, is the Uniform Acknowledgment Letter (UAL). The ATM may generate and issue an approved UAL substitute instead of Letter 4141(CG). Current approved UAL substitutes are:

    1. Letter 4837, Acknowledgment Letter, and Letter 3846, Acknowledgment Letter. These are Combination letters (combined UAL and conference letters) that apply to Collection Due Process cases. These letters can be used if generated using APGOLF and issued within 30 days from when the case is received in Appeals.

    2. Letter 3808 (or 3808-A) . These are Combination letters that apply to Small (S) docketed cases worked in campus operations.

    3. Letter 4031, Campus Penalty Appeals Uniform Acknowledgment Letter. This is the UAL used by the ATM for Penalty Appeal cases worked in campus operations.

    4. Letter 4046, Appeals Team Case Leader Uniform Acknowledgment Letter. This is the UAL used by the ATCL manager for cases worked in ATCL operations.

  8. Providing an IRS publication, IRS notice, or IRS brochure serves as an explanation to the taxpayer of the content in the document.

  9. The ATM may not change the content of the UAL on APGOLF, but may add or delete an enclosure if the change improves the information provided to the taxpayer.

    1. On the UAL, the ATM identifies the specific IRS publications, IRS notices or IRS brochures enclosed with the UAL. The name and number of a specific enclosure prints on the face of the letter if it is selected as an enclosure on the APGOLF UAL template. These enclosures are pre-selected for the UAL based upon the category and type of case; whether the case is in docketed or non-docketed status; and whether the case is worked in campus or field operations. The selected enclosures were identified as information adding value to the taxpayer. If the ATM eliminates a pre-selected enclosure, the reasons for the decision need documenting on the CAR. Pre-selected enclosures include Notice 1016,Publication 4227,Publication 4167 and Publication 4576. See Exhibit 1.4.28-1 for a detailed list of recommended pre-selected enclosures for the UAL based upon the category and type of case.

    2. If a notice or publication is applicable to the case and it is not a pre-selected enclosure, the ATM may add the enclosure.

      By enclosing You are explaining
      Notice 1016, How to Stop Interest on Your Account How to stop interest on a proposed or potential liability.
      Publication 4227, Welcome to Appeals The Appeals process.
      Publication 4167, Introduction to Alternative Dispute Resolution Post Appeals mediation, fast track settlement, fast track mediation, early referrals, and arbitration.
      Publication 4576, Orientation to the Penalty Appeals Process The Appeal process, right to representation, and payment options for Penalty Appeals cases.

      Note:

      Not all of the enclosures mentioned apply to all cases. For example, Notice 1016 is not a pre-selected enclosure for an Offer in Compromise, TEFRA or Collection Due Process case since this notice discusses how to stop interest on a proposed or potential deficiency. Publication 4227 is not a pre-selected enclosure for a Penalty Appeals case worked in campus operations since Publication 4576 is more applicable to the case. Publication 4167 is not a pre-selected enclosure for a Collection Due Process case, Offer in Compromise case worked in campus operations, or docketed case, as post Appeals mediation does not apply.

  10. Each Area Technical Advisor will run a standard AdHoc template to identify non-docketed CDP and OIC cases received within the preceding 30 calendar days and for which a UAL was not issued. The Area Technical Advisor will run the AdHoc query at least monthly to ensure the cases are identified in a timely manner. The Area Technical Advisors will provide each ATM with the listing for their team with sufficient time remaining to meet the 30 day UAL issuance standard. The ATMs will ensure that the UAL is issued timely.

1.4.28.3.1.1  (11-13-2014)
Assignment of Work Units - Considerations

  1. Consider the status or condition of each Appeals Officer or Settlement Officer's inventory, as well as his/her areas of particular expertise and experiences. To make an intelligent assignment decision, a manager must have knowledge of the:

    1. Employee's ability

    2. Size and status of assigned inventory and

    3. Grade of the case

  2. Inspect newly received work units to determine the issues involved, grades, and separate into groups of possible conference sites.

  3. During inspection of work units, be alert for any weaknesses in case development serious enough to prevent Appeals from properly considering and deciding the case.

    1. If serious developmental weaknesses are found, return the case file to the Examination office before assignment. See IRM 8.2, Pre 90-Day and 90-Day Cases, for the relevant provision.

    2. It may be beneficial to discuss the return of a work unit with an Examination representative before making a decision on whether to retain or release jurisdiction of the work unit. However, if such discussion extends beyond ministerial, administrative or procedural matters, the taxpayer must be given an opportunity to participate. For "ex parte" communication guidance, see Rev. Proc. 2012-18, 2012-10 I.R.B. 1, and IRM 8.1.10, Appeals Function, Ex Parte Communications. In the event of an ex parte communications breach, the ATM will contact the area technical advisor with the necessary details.

  4. Take special care in making assignments when travel away from a headquarters office or post of duty is involved. Cost effectiveness of circuit-riding conferences is best achieved when an employee has sufficient assignments to schedule multiple conferences at each circuit-riding location.

  5. Bring any unusual features or special instructions to the attention of the employee assigned the case.

  6. In general, rotate appeals officers on cases so they are not assigned more than two consecutive work units of the same taxpayer. However, if most of the substantial issues in a subsequent receipt are identical, good management practice favors continuation of the same appeals officer.

  7. It is good practice to assign an appeals officer as a team member to consider continuing issues from prior years. Also, units involving a different year or different type of tax on a taxpayer already having a case pending may be assigned to the same appeals officer if the old work unit is not nearing completion. Assign a work unit requiring reconsideration, for whatever cause, to the appeals officer who originally handled it

  8. For information regarding case grading IRM 1.4.28.8.

1.4.28.3.2  (08-16-2013)
Control of Work

  1. Control of work units for the office is the responsibility of Account and Processing Support. See IRM 8.20 Appeals Case Processing Manual. Each employee is responsible for controlling assigned inventory. Monitor the work unit while in process. Basic tools available are workload reviews and live case reviews.

  2. In addition, Appeals managers should utilize trial status requests and trial calendars in order to achieve Appeals' objectives under Rev. Proc. 87–24.

    Note:

    Appeals Team Managers are responsible for entering the ACAPDATE on ACDS.

1.4.28.3.2.1  (08-16-2013)
Inventory and Unit Time Report

  1. The inventory and unit time report contains a variety of information. For example, an analysis of an Appeals Officer's/Settlement Officer's time report shows -

    1. Size of the AO/SO's inventory

    2. AO/SO's use of time

    3. Whether inventory is being managed with regard to proper priorities

    4. Whether inventory is being managed in an organized manner

    5. Periods of inactivity on specific work units

    6. Accumulated time per work unit

    7. General status of the inventory

    8. Greater amount of time applied to indirect activities than appears justified

  2. Managers may wish to make written comments regarding case progress, etc., on the time report, where appropriate.

1.4.28.3.2.2  (08-16-2013)
Case Summary Cards

  1. Appeals Centralized Database System (ACDS) is a computerized case control system used by Appeals to control and track cases coming into and leaving Appeals. The case summary card is generated by the computer after the case and return level information is input. The case summary card displays all information for the case. The total work unit dollars and grade of the work unit appear on the card.

  2. The case summary card is used by the appeals officer or settlement officer to identify and control cases in his or her inventory. Use the case summary card for many of the same purposes as the time report is used, but cards must be used to record and accumulate information not available in an appeals officer's time report. Thus, use the cards as an adjunct to the time report.

1.4.28.3.2.3  (08-16-2013)
Case Activity Record and Time Sheet

  1. The Case Activity Record and Time Sheet (CARATS) is an automated system which replaces the manual Case Activity Record (CAR) and the Inventory and Unit Time Report. The computer program automatically posts time on the time sheet and case activity record based on information input into the system by the appeals officer or settlement officer.

  2. At the end of the month, the computer generates both the CAR and the monthly time sheet. The specific CARATS measures for "Appeals Officer Works Cases" are designed to assist management to improve the "Case Consideration System" .

1.4.28.3.3  (08-16-2013)
ACDS Manager Proxy

  1. The ACDS proxy module provides managers with a means to delegate access to their ACDS accounts to acting managers.

  2. A proxy has full managerial access to ACDS and all actions taken by the proxy will be recorded as those having been completed by the manager. ACDS does not record the proxy’s name on these actions. However, ACDS lists all proxies assigned.

  3. An ACDS Proxy Manager's Guide was prepared by Appeals and should be utilized to answer general, functional questions about the proxy program. Access this guide from the Appeals Intranet Home Page > Systems & Technology > ACDS > Resources > Manager Proxy Guide.

  4. The following managers will have permissions to assign a proxy on ACDS. The bulleted positions identify the proxy population appropriate for each manager:

    Manager Allowable Proxy Positions
    Appeals Team Managers
    • Any other ATM, nationwide

    • Any AO or SO, nationwide

    Processing Team Managers
    • Any other PTM, nationwide

    • A Lead Tax Examiner in their group

    Tax Computation Specialist Managers
    • Any other TCS manager, nationwide

    • Any TCS, nationwide

    • Any AO or SO, nationwide

  5. BSP Account Administrators have global access and have permission to assign a proxy on ACDS when a manager is not available to make the assignment.

  6. The following limitations apply:

    1. The manager can assign multiple proxies, but the "effective" dates cannot overlap.

    2. A manager cannot assign a proxy for any other manager.

    3. If a manager is unavailable to assign a proxy, the office of the Area Director/Area Manager will request a proxy assignment by submitting an OS GetServices ticket.

  7. Actions of the proxy will be restricted as follows:

    1. The proxy cannot approve an update to his or her own case.

    2. The proxy cannot approve a closure of his or her own case.

    3. The proxy cannot assign another employee as proxy.

  8. The following question and answer scenarios discuss the most routine situations encountered where a proxy is involved:

      Question Answer
    1 When a manager needs to extend an assignment but does not have access to ACDS, who extends the assignment? If the manager is not available, direction should be obtained from the Area Director/Area Manager and IRM 1.4.28.3.3 be followed to make the assignment.
    2 When a manager assigns a proxy for a specific period but returns earlier than scheduled, what happens to the proxy? The manager amends the proxy assignment to an earlier ending date.
    3 When the manager is away and the assigned proxy cannot complete the assignment, who assigns the new proxy? The Area Director/Area Manager requests the assignment via an OS GetServices ticket.
    4 When a manager assigns a proxy (proxy #1) to serve for an extended period of time, can the manager assign another proxy (proxy #2) to the same group for the sole purpose of assigning cases to and approving the closures of proxy #1? No. This creates two proxies with overlapping periods. Instead, consider reassigning the proxy (on ACDS) to another local ATM.

1.4.28.4  (08-16-2013)
Introduction

  1. Timely, ongoing, accurate review of your employees work is one of the most important duties of a manager. A managers providing ongoing, candid, and meaningful employee feedback is essential to employee satisfaction. Many potential problems can be caught and corrected in their initial stages before they become a significant issue when reviews are completed timely on an ongoing basis.

  2. This is an integral part of an Appeals Team Manager's responsibilities. Managerial reviews of employee work allows the manager to:

    1. Assess the employee's effectiveness in meeting the expectations established in their Critical Job Elements

    2. Determine the employee's efficiency in carrying out the laws, procedures, and policies of the Service

    3. Identify and acknowledge exceptional work

    4. Identify and address performance problems

    5. Evaluate the employee's ability to properly plan and schedule office and flexiplace work activity

    6. Ensure the employee is taking timely and appropriate actions to bring the case to prompt and proper resolution

    7. Assess employee effectiveness in developmental case assignments

    8. Ensure correspondence is sent to the appropriate parties and reinforce the importance of Power of Attorney involvement in case activities

  3. To ensure better engaged and informed managers in Appeals; meaningful review and discussion of targeted case assignments, followed with written, evaluative feedback must happen throughout the rating year. As part of this feedback, the Appeals Team Manager should complete both Workload Reviews and Live/Closed Case Reviews during their review of each employees work.

1.4.28.4.1  (08-16-2013)
Right of Consultation

  1. The Appeals Team Manager should ensure that employees properly adhere to IRC 7521(b)(2) and IRC 7521(c) pertaining to taxpayer's right to consultation and power of attorney authorization.

  2. IRS employees are required to stop an interview if the taxpayer requests to consult with a representative and may not bypass a representative without supervisory approval as detailed in Treasury Regulation 601.506(b).

  3. Taxpayers are afforded the right to designate a qualified representative to act on their behalf when interacting with the IRS.

  4. Appeals Team Managers should ensure that hearing officers adhere to these directives and include this item in case reviews to ensure hearing officers are involving representatives in all case actions.

1.4.28.4.2  (08-16-2013)
Workload Reviews

  1. Workload reviews when combined with live/closed case reviews are the best tools available to a manager when evaluating the case management practices and work habits of Appeals personnel.

  2. Managers will do a minimum of one workload review per year; preferably at mid-year, which will focus on case management issues such as eminent statutes, overage cases, significant time on case and cases with no conference or no activity for an extended period of time. This review should also help you identify exemplary casework, good workload management skills and employee strengths. The review can also confirm workload issues, calendar management skills and areas of training needs for your employee and team.

  3. More frequent reviews are necessary when serious performance deficiencies and a need for development are identified.

  4. Generally, the tools in conducting a workload review are the Case Activity Record (CAR), time report, the Appeals case summary cards, a copy of the prior workload review report, if any, a discussion with the employee and live case reviews.

  5. The primary objective of a workload review is for the manager to gain a specific understanding of the status of each work unit in an employee's inventory. Workload reviews, when properly conducted, involve a substantial amount of time. This will be time well spent as it gives the manager insight into each employee's work habits, case management practices, technical abilities and identifies areas where training and development are needed. It provides managerial insight as to the exact status of each employee's inventory and gives them a basis for frequent but quick follow-up. Strengths and weaknesses in performance are clearly identified with specific examples. A workload review also offers an opportunity to give specific guidance and direction with respect to specific management practices and technical abilities.

  6. A workload review enables the manager to evaluate and give feedback as to how well an employee is managing inventory by appraisal of the following factors:

    1. Adequate initial review of new work units

    2. Adequate statute procedures and documentation

    3. Adequacy of inventory

    4. Units being worked on a first in, first out (FIFO) basis except when priorities dictate otherwise

    5. Overall workload planning

    6. Prompt conferences

    7. Conference preparation (for prompt decision and to minimize number of conferences)

    8. Additional information requested, whether actually needed, timely target dates for its submission established

    9. Timely follow-up, follow-up control

    10. Prompt decisions reached

    11. Prompt submission of work unit for review

    12. Accumulated time-in-process in total and on individual work units (in relationship to the status of the work unit)

    13. A workload review helps the manager identify whether the employee is maintaining communications with the taxpayer, keeping the taxpayer aware of their options and appropriately including their representative in all communications

      Note:

      Managers are to monitor this on all non-docketed cases that remain in inventory over one year.

  7. In addition to the above, a workload review enables the manager to make judgments concerning an employee's:

    1. Overall work load planning ability

    2. Application of technical and procedural guidelines

    3. Effective use of time

    4. Efficient travel habits

    5. Compatibility of work with grade

    6. Need for special advice and assistance

  8. A workload review also offers an opportunity for:

    1. Early identification of unagreed units

    2. Identification of units on which a decision is needed

    3. Resolution of unwarranted case closing delays

    4. Curtailment of repeated contacts for piecemeal development of facts

    5. Establishing priorities

    6. Verification of the grade of the work unit

    7. Determine if the employee's workload is appropriately balanced in regard to time spent working on units below, at, and above their grade level

    8. A forum for discussion of the employes career goals and career learning plan

  9. Following a workload review, the manager should promptly give the employee their written analysis and summary. Cite specific instances of exemplary performance or weaknesses in performance. Clearly state guidance and direction. Set out any agreements between you and the employee with respect to specific action, target dates and overall performance.

  10. Have the employee acknowledge receipt of the memorandum or any other document summarizing the results of the workload review by initialing the manager's copy.

1.4.28.4.3  (08-16-2013)
Workload Review Preparation

  1. The initial preparation for the workload review can be done in advance. This includes a worksheet listing all work units in the employee's inventory, setting out the following information for each work unit:

    1. Name of key taxpayer

    2. Date assigned

    3. Number of cases

    4. Deficiency (overassessment)

    5. Accumulated time

    6. Initial conference date

    7. Status of the work unit and

    8. Statute of limitations dates

  2. The information required in (1) above is obtainable from the employee's most recent time report and the case inventory screen on ACDS. Obtain additional information for the workload review from the Diagnostic And Balanced Measures (D&BAM) database, ACDS statute listings and AdHoc reports. Make sure the work sheet provides space for the manager to make notes during the live case review.

  3. The worksheet described in (1) above could be the foundation, at the conclusion of the workload review, for the memorandum to the employee. Set out any brief discussions of each work unit reviewed, including the information itemized.

  4. Whenever possible, a manager may use ACDS to document reviews. The manager can then use ACDS to document and share workload and live case reviews and conference observations with their employees.

1.4.28.4.4  (08-16-2013)
Live Case Reviews

  1. A live case review is a review conducted by a manager before the employee submits a work unit for approval, but generally after the employee has had an opportunity to make significant progress with the work unit.

  2. A closed case review is a review conducted by a manager after the employee has submitted a work unit for approval.

  3. The following lists the minimum number of live (open) and/or closed case reviews required each year by employee grade level. The mix of reviews conducted annually is at the discretion of the manager.

    • GS 7/9/11/12 Appeals Officers, Settlement Officers, Appeals Account Resolution Specialists, and Appeals Tax Specialists - seven (7) cases reviewed per year

    • GS 13 Appeals Officers and Settlement Officers - five (5) cases reviewed per year

    • GS 14 Appeals Officers - three (3) cases reviewed per year

  4. The grade (case difficulty) of the case selected for these reviews should be the same as the grade level of the employee being reviewed. See case grading exhibits at the end of this IRM starting with Exhibit 1.4.28-2.

  5. Where there are observed deficiencies in case performance, whether related to timeliness or decision quality, the manager will review additional cases sufficient to impact improvements or to support rating reductions at levels above the standard minimum noted above.

  6. The scope of these evaluative reviews will be limited to a simple affirmation next to each performance standard that it has been met. Additional supporting narrative will only be required when a standard is not met, or when it has been exceeded.

    Note:

    It is important that noteworthy accomplishments are documented, as well as failures to meet standards of performance. The reviews should encompass comments which document all of the critical elements for the employee.

  7. A thorough live case review gives a manager an in-depth view of the work habits of an employee that cannot be obtained during normal review of the case file at closing. A live review during the time a work unit is in process also saves review time at closing.

  8. The use of ACDS to document workload, open, and closed case reviews is encouraged.

  9. If ACDS is not used to document the review, prepare a memorandum briefly setting out the following with respect to each work unit reviewed:

    1. Name of the work unit

    2. Date assigned

    3. Number and dates of conferences

    4. Time (hours) to date

    5. Tax and penalties in dispute

    6. Major issues and status

    7. Case management (prompt contact, prompt conference)

    8. Adherence to power of attorney requirements

    9. Rough draft of the Appeals Case Memo (issues framed properly, facts, law and argument adequate, questions set forth)

    10. Work papers filed in chronological order

    11. Conference memo (if appropriate)

    12. Specific target dates set

    13. Follow-up made

    14. Progress towards settlement (a proposal by taxpayer, proposal by appeals officer/settlement officer, appeals officer/settlement officer's position known by taxpayer)

    15. Time commensurate to work performed

    16. Other information and observations

    17. Agreements between employee and manager with respect to future action

  10. Have the employee acknowledge receipt of the memorandum or other document summarizing the results of the live case review by initializing the manager's copy. This can be done electronically if ACDS is used for the live or closed case review.

1.4.28.5  (08-16-2013)
Conference Observation

  1. Periodically, you may sit in on conferences of appeals officers and settlement officers for observation of his/her performance in the conference setting. Factors to observe:

    • Conference preparation

    • Exchange of information

    • Open discussion

    • Appearance of impartiality

    • Discussion of proposed settlement

    • Solicitation of settlement proposal

    • Action on proposal

    • Additional information, documentation needed

    • Who is to act next

    • When is it to be accomplished

  2. Give the employee feedback with respect to the conference performance promptly afterwards, concentrating on strengths and need for improvement.

1.4.28.6  (08-16-2013)
Overall Control of Work

  1. In addition to controlling work in the hands of Appeals Officers, Settlement Officers, Tax Specialists and Account Resolution Specialists, managers also control work in:

    1. An Account and Processing Support (APS) location, headed by a Processing Team Manager

    2. A Tax Computation Specialist (TCS) team, headed by a TCS team manager and

    3. Support administrative personnel, under the control of a team manager

  2. Operational reviews are a major means available to ensure efficient operation of the support areas.

  3. An important task of the reviewing administrative personnel or other designee is to conduct a procedural review of case files before submission to the manager for technical review. Spot check the quality of the procedural review and the quality of the computation during the manager's technical review of the case file. Sometimes feedback from appeals officers gives a good clue as to whether or not the computation area is operating efficiently. Frequently, indications of how efficiently APS is processing cases is determined at the time units are assigned.

1.4.28.7  (08-16-2013)
Case Work Reviews

  1. Taxpayers, their representatives, Compliance personnel, and the Service as a whole, look to Appeals to render decisions based on the facts, judicious application of Service policy, and sound legal principles.

  2. Delegation Order No. 66 (as revised) delegates settlement authority to Appeals Team Managers, and Appeals Team Case Leaders. This authority may not be re-delegated to appeals officers, except for limited authority in assessed penalty cases. The appeals officer's proposed settlement is only a recommendation; you have the authority and responsibility to accept or reject. You must assure yourself of the quality of the appeals officer's decision and recommendation. Accomplish this through review of the settlement memorandum and case file, prior knowledge of the case during the negotiation process, or knowledge of the appeals officer's technical expertise and quality of decisions.

    Note:

    Appeals Officers are delegated settlement authority in Fast Track Settlement cases.

  3. Case work review provides one of the best means of evolving a day-to-day evaluation of an appeals officer or settlement officer's performance. More important, it gives you continuously updated data on strengths and weaknesses for use in training, motivating through job enrichment, and otherwise helping the employee to develop maximum potential. It provides facts to use at rating time, as opposed to impressions gained from recent sampling of work performance. When reviewing a case, be alert to areas of weakness in an employee's handling of cases, which should be corrected through discussion or further training, as well as the employee's strengths and abilities.

  4. Recognize that the majority of issues referred to Appeals are controversial and rest upon judgment and opinion on which reasonable and honest people may hold divergent views. You, as reviewing official in striving to ensure high-quality decisions, ordinarily will not substitute personal judgment for that of the appeals officer when the decision is fairly supported by facts and applicable law. If your review shows that the appeals officer understands and correctly applies basic settlement philosophy of Appeals as set forth in IRM 8.6.,Conference and Settlement Practices, the appeals officer's conclusions resting on judgment will ordinarily be accepted. If in your judgment the proposed settlement is not supported and is inappropriate, however, or if it would result in inconsistencies, you must reject the settlement.

  5. In a case in which there is a verbatim recording of the proceedings and a potential conference performance problem is identified, you may wish to listen to the tape(s) to determine whether counseling or training of the employee is necessary. Make disciplinary actions or evaluations of performance involving a verbatim recording of a conference in accordance with current IRS-union agreements. Consult with your labor relations specialist. You must also determine whether to have a transcript made of appropriate portions of the recording in case later access to it becomes necessary as provided for in any current union contract.

1.4.28.7.1  (08-16-2013)
Extent of Case Work Reviews

  1. The Appeals Team Manager must make a review of sufficient depth to assure the correctness of the action which is proposed. Judgment must be exercised, however, in determining the scope of the review activity. You are expected to know the staff and adapt the depth of review to what is actually needed. Some work of all employees should be comprehensively reviewed on a random basis. Generally highly qualified, experienced employees do not need continuous close review. Others, particularly new employees, those with identified performance deficiencies, and employees going into new areas of marked increased difficulty, need close review. Tailor the degree of review to the ability of the employee and the characteristics of the specific case.

  2. A comprehensive review includes technical and procedural accuracy as well as case management practice and adherence to Appeals' objectives and policy statements. Documents to be inspected in a comprehensive review include:

    1. Transmittal memorandum (customized form 5402)

    2. Settlement memorandum

    3. Agreement documents

    4. Closing agreements

    5. Contracts and other supporting documental evidence

    6. Revenue Agent's or Revenue Officer's report (Special Agent's report, if any)

    7. Returns

    8. Power of Attorney

    9. Correspondence

    10. Conference memos

    11. Affidavits

    12. Protest

    13. Notice of Deficiency and petition (if docketed

    14. Revenue Agent's, Revenue Officer's, Appeals Officer's, and Settlement Officer's work papers

    15. Applicable statutory and case law

    16. Case summary cards and

    17. Appeals officer/settlement officer inventory and unit time report

    18. Case Activity Record

  3. Additional information regarding possible material to be reviewed is provided in this chapter.

  4. Notify the employee in writing when exemplary performance or a deficiency in performance is identified during a case review. Place copies of such documentation in the employee's performance file.

  5. Generally cases submitted by employees under your supervision are reviewed by you. However, in rare instances, such as when your workload is very heavy, selected cases may be assigned to an appeals officer or settlement officer for preliminary review. You remain responsible for the correctness of the conclusion.

  6. Review functions are necessary to ensure accuracy in transmittal memoranda, supporting statements, and related materials are many and varied, ranging from verification of format, caption data and grammar to soundness of determination of tax liability. Many of these functions can, and should, be handled by clerical personnel. They will obtain greater job satisfaction in being entrusted to do this work and your time will not be taken up by the details which others can verify and act upon.

  7. It is important that review of cases occur promptly upon submission by the employee. This is a continuation of the attitude of experience and good case management we expect of Appeals' employees. If it is an agreed case, deficiency or overassessment, it is incumbent upon us to have the tax assessed as promptly as possible (deficiency cases) and to process refunds as promptly as possible (overassessment cases) in order to stop the accrual of interest.

  8. For agreed Collection type cases, prompt case review is very important for timely processing of installment agreements or Offers in Compromise, updates to Currently Not Collectible (CNC) status, input of account adjustments, and so on.

  9. Prompt review of unagreed Collection type cases is also critically important to ensure the timely issuance of determination letters so that cases can be resolved as soon as possible and returned to Collection for enforcement actions, if appropriate.

1.4.28.7.2  (08-16-2013)
Closed Case Work Reviews

  1. Prepare closed case evaluations on a random or systematic basis (every xth case), consistent with area policy and the performance and experience level of the appeals officer/settlement officer. Specific cases will also be selected for review as determined by the manager.

  2. Once you approve the recommended disposition of a case selected for evaluation, you may utilize ACDS to prepare the closed case review. The ACDS format allows rating of individual aspects of each critical job element and provides space for narrative for each aspect.

  3. When you do not approve a settlement recommendation in certain Pre-90-Day, 90-Day and Agreed 90-Day income tax cases, the taxpayer may be entitled to a conference with you. See IRM 8.2.1, Reviewing Official's Rejection of Settlement Proposal.

  4. Case evaluations must address specific facets of the performance, tying the description and evaluation of the performance to the aspects of the AO/SO position.

  5. Written case reviews must be shared with the employee according to the provisions of the IRS/NTEU contract.

1.4.28.7.3  (08-16-2013)
Correspondence Reviews

  1. Appeals officers and settlement officers are authorized to sign, in their own names, certain correspondence such as scheduling conferences, transmittal or agreement forms, forwarding consent forms, etc. Routine correspondence authorized to be signed by appeals officers or settlement officers in their own names need not be reviewed by or for managers. Spot checks these for quality after mailing.

  2. Review correspondence prepared for signature of a manager to ensure it is courteous, clear, concise, and is promptly handled.

  3. Area Directors should personally review replies to certain types of correspondence, such as Congressional letters, taxpayer complaint letters, dissenting memoranda and Headquarters' inquiries.

1.4.28.7.4  (08-16-2013)
Work of Tax Computation Specialists (TCS)

  1. In general, limit your review of settlement computations, Notices of Deficiency, and Rule 155 computations prepared by Tax Computation Specialists to verifying correctness of legal applications. Examine statements involving unusual audit features for technical accuracy and from time to time randomly select samples for more intensive review. Unusually difficult or complicated settlement computations and notices may occasionally need comprehensive review.

  2. Maintain an evaluation of TCS's work so as to provide the supervisor with facts to use at rating time.

  3. See Exhibit 1.4.28-6 for case grading criteria. The exhibit is not all inclusive:

    1. "Simple" cases are typically of limited scope and complexity requiring limited judgment and decision-making

    2. "Complex" cases typically require considerable judgment and knowledge to interpret and apply tax law and related case documents

    3. A lack of clear guidelines and precedent-setting cases often requires extensive research and special knowledge

  4. Some of the Appeals Tax Computation Specialists procedures are contained in IRM 8.17, Settlement Computations and Statutory Notices of Deficiency.

1.4.28.7.4.1  (11-20-2013)
Case Reviews of Tax Computation Specialists

  1. TCS managers should conduct sufficient case reviews to provide adequate feedback to and document performance of their employees. The reviews can be in the form of:

    • Live case review - A review conducted by a manager before the employee returns the work request to the requestor, but generally after the employee has had an opportunity to make significant progress with the work unit.

    • Closed case review - A review conducted by a manager after the employee has completed the work on the request.

  2. The mix of live or closed reviews conducted annually, as well as the extent of review, is at the discretion of the manager. For example, a manager may choose to:

    • Review the Form 3623Statement of Account

    • Review the Form 2285Concurrent Determinations of Deficiencies

    • Review the Sequa Worksheet

    • Conduct a procedural review

    • Conduct a comprehensive review

  3. The following lists the minimum number of live or closed case reviews required each year by employee grade level.

    • GS 7/9/11/12 TCS - seven (7) cases reviewed per year.

    • GS 13 TCS - three (3) cases reviewed per year.

1.4.28.7.5  (08-16-2013)
Work of Secretarial and Clerical Personnel

  1. Occasionally inspect files and card records maintained by clerical personnel to see if employees understand their duties and are properly performing them. You are responsible for determining if files and card records are properly maintained and functioning.

1.4.28.8  (08-16-2013)
Guidelines for Determining The Grade Levels of Appeals Work Units

  1. The grading of an Appeals work unit is based on the complexity and difficulty of the case. The manager considers criteria such as the degree of factual complexity and legal complexity of the issues, the impact/sensitivity of the case and the conference/negotiating skills required by the case. See Exhibit 1.4.28-2 for factors to consider on Exam Sourced work. The Collection Case Grading Matrix is incorporated in this IRM as Exhibit 1.4.28-5.

  2. Appeals has developed specific case grading guidance for Penalty Appeals and Innocent Spouse cases. The information is on the Appeals web: http://appeals.web.irs.gov/managers/managers_resource.htm. To access the case grading guidelines go to the Appeals home page and click on Managers Resources.

  3. All work units involving Employee Plan or Exempt Organization issues are graded 13 unless application of the criteria in the appropriate exhibits warrant another grade.

  4. The grading matrix for Art Appraisal Services is located in Exhibit 1.4.28-7.

1.4.28.8.1  (08-16-2013)
Relationship of These Guidelines to Position Management

  1. These guidelines do not supersede Office of Personnel Management (OPM) classification standards. Position classification factors such as supervision and guidance cannot be measured by these guidelines.

  2. Appeals employees may be assigned some work units above their grade level for developmental purposes. Such experience is considered to be at the higher level if normal supervision is given. However, when assignments above the grade level of the employee are completed under closer than normal supervision, the assignment is considered to be consistent with the employee's grade. The assignment of higher or lower grade work units does not affect the grade level of an employee's position if it is for short periods to provide developmental opportunities or to meet specific operational needs.

  3. Grade levels of positions are not based solely on grade levels of work units assigned; other factors are considered, such as degree of supervision received and personal contacts.

  4. Appeals managers are responsible for:

    1. Assigning work consistent with an employee's grade level

    2. Keeping developmental assignments within reasonable limits and

    3. Informing an employee of the distinctions between the work unit grades and position grade

  5. Position classifiers are responsible for:

    1. Making the final determinations on the position grade levels

    2. Providing advisory services to Appeals' managers on position management and work assignment practices and

    3. Assisting Appeals' management in determining that case grades accurately reflect the relevant OPM standards and that the grade structure is appropriate for the workload of the Appeals office

  6. If the Appeals Team Manager decides that a systemically assigned grade level should be lowered, the manager will make an entry in the activity record and document the reasons for the lower grade level. In accordance with the National Agreement II between the IRS and NTEU, the manager will also send an email to the employee assigned the case informing him/her of the reasons for the lower grade level.

1.4.28.9  (08-16-2013)
Referrals to Appeals Domestic Operations, International, and TEGE

  1. The Appeals Domestic Operations and International Operations ensures nationwide uniform and consistent settlement of issues, enhances the identification and timely resolution of issues, and provides coordination for technical issues.

  2. The following issues are referred to Domestic and/or International Operations. The appropriate Feature Code to input to ACDS is indicated after each issue. Domestic Operations and International Operations have parallel roles and responsibilities except in a few areas as noted in the IRM. If the Feature Code is not in the ACDS case record, it will be input by the AO/ATCL when the referral is made.

    1. Compliance Coordinated Issues (IS)

    2. Appeals Coordinated Issues (ACI)

    3. Appeals Emerging Issues (EM)

    4. Abusive Tax Avoidance Transactions (LT)

  3. International Operations provides coordination and expertise to Appeals Management and Appeals Officers (AOs) for International and economist issues.

    1. The above coordinated issues also need to have Feature Code "IC" (International Case) input to ACDS.

    2. The definition of International Issues, including coordinated, non-coordinated, and emerging issues can be found on the Appeals International website.

  4. Domestic Operations also receives referrals regarding:

    1. Engineering Issues

    2. Financial Products Issues

  5. The ATCL/TL must prepare the referral whether or not any of the above issues are being considered for assignment to a team member or retained by the ATCL/TL. Coordination by the Technical Specialist will continue in accordance with IRM 8.7.3Technical and Procedural Guidelines, Domestic Operations and International Programs.

  6. Refer all Estate and Gift (E&G) valuation issues with tax of $10M or more to the Appraisal Services ATM-TG for consultation in accordance with IRM 8.18.1, Valuation Assistance Procedures.

  7. Refer all TEGE issues, Exempt Plans (EP), Exempt Organizations (EO), Tax Exempt Bonds (TEB) and Government Entities (GE), to the Appeals TEGE team manager in accordance with IRM 8.16Appeals TE/GE Cases. The TEGE referral procedures are obtained on the Appeals web page for TEGE.

  8. As soon as possible after assignment, ATMs will forward referrals (Form 13381), as generated by ACDS, or obtained from the Appeals website, via email with any issue(s) or case assignment recommendations to the appropriate ATM. (Please use "Referral" or "Form 13381" in the email subject line, the taxpayer's name or work unit number (WUNO) on the form and encrypt the email and all attached files where warranted).

    Note:

    Domestic, International, and TEGE assistance includes team member assignment, direct case assignment or consultation. A technical specialist or appeals officer from one of these areas may be requested as a consultant when he/she is used solely to discuss issue(s). However, once the consultant is expected to negotiate, work or otherwise be responsible for an issue(s), re-designate him/her as a team member. If no assistance is needed, please provide the reason(s) in Block #28 of Form 13381.

  9. Forward International referrals to the respective ATM indicated in the coverage maps located on the Appeals web page.

  10. The receiving ATM determines the level of assistance to be provided based on all available facts including existing workload.

  11. Generally within five workdays, (sooner if required), the ATM will make the assignment determination.

  12. The ATM returns the completed referral as an attachment via encrypted email to the requesting ATM for association with the case file. At closing, the ATCL/AO attaches the referral to Form 3608, Request for Audit Work.

1.4.28.10  (08-16-2013)
Direct Shipment of Cases to Account and Processing Support

  1. This exhibit contains mandatory procedures for Appeals Team Managers (ATMs) to directly ship closed cases to Account and Processing Support. It establishes the responsibility for ensuring these cases properly ship from a post-of-duty to a designated APS office.

  2. ATM inputs ACAPDATE - When an ATM inputs an ACAPDATE, he/she will be asked a series of questions on the ATM closing screen including the reasons why the case is going to APS:

    • Closing

    • SND

    • STIPFF

    • Trial Prep

    • Transfer

    Depending on the answers given and the physical location of the ATM approving the case, ACDS will automatically populate the name and address of the Processing Team Manager (PTM) who should receive the case.

  3. ACAPDATE Already Present - If the ACAPDATE is already present on ACDS, the system automatically detects the appropriate PTM without having to answer additional questions. In addition, the following fields populate automatically:

    • Action Code "Shipped"

    • To Date

    • POD to which case is being shipped

  4. ATM has Case - When the ATM is co-located with the ATM secretary and has physical possession of the case, the ATM secretary has primary responsibility for shipping it to APS. However, each POD should designate a back-up who will be responsible for shipping cases when the primary designee is out of the office or when the volume of closings is high in that POD. The only time APS has primary responsibility is when the ATM is not co-located with a secretary and there are no other secretaries.

  5. Table of Responsibility - The following table provides details to help determine who has responsibility for shipping the case:

    ATM with Physical Possession of Case
    ATM co-located with Primary Shipping Responsibility Secondary or Backup Shipping Responsibility
    • ATM secretary

    • Other secretaries

    • APS

    ATM secretary Other secretaries
    • ATM secretary

    • APS

    ATM secretary APS
    • Other secretaries

    • APS

    Other secretaries APS
    • Other secretaries

    Other secretaries  
    • APS

    APS  
    • No secretaries/APS

    Current procedures remain in effect  
  6. ATM Does Not have Case - If an ATM does not have physical possession of the closed case at the time of approval, he/she may authorize the technical employee, who does have physical possession, to facilitate shipment directly to the appropriate APS unit. The ATM will print the screen showing the PTM shipping information and provide it to the Appeals/Settlement Officer or secretary responsible for shipping the case. Use the table above to determine who is responsible for shipping the case from the POD.

  7. Rules That Apply:

    1. ATMs must use this process for every type of case identified in IRM 1.4.28.10(2) above.

    2. Other secretaries include those assigned to Headquarters or other specialty groups within Appeals.

    3. Local APS only has responsibility when there are no secretaries in the POD.

    4. All employees responsible for shipping cases will prepare and monitor Form 3210.

  8. Director, APS Responsibility - The APS Director will maintain the table used by ACDS to identify the appropriate PTM and work streams.

  9. All Managers Responsibility. Appeals managers, Senior Operations Advisors, and Technical Advisors should work together to address shipping needs in each POD. In addition, they should ensure all remote employees are familiar with the procedures pertaining to their particular location.

1.4.28.11  (08-16-2013)
Timely Processing of Remittances

  1. Appeals Team Managers must ensure that procedures are in place for the timely processing of remittances.

  2. Appeals management must ensure every office that has Appeals employees has suitable procedures in place for the timely identification and processing of remittances in accordance with IRM 8.7.17.2, Advance Payments and Other Remittances Received in Appeals. Some of the considerations may include:

    • Designating specific personnel for daily mail receipt and the processing of remittances.

    • A contingency plan in the event that assigned personnel are not available to open mail and process remittances.

    • Processing of payments received by Counsel when it is appropriate to do so and when Counsel and Appeals are located in the same POD and Appeals has the resources to assist.

Exhibit 1.4.28-1 
Pre-Selected Enclosures for the UAL Based Upon the Category and Type of Case

Category Type UAL Enclosures To Send With The Uniform Acknowledgement Letter(UAL) Explanation
      Notice 1016 PUB 4167 PUB 4227 PUB 4576  
CDP   4141(CG) or 4837/3846 if applicable         IRM 8.22
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OICC OIC (Field) 4141(CG)   Include Include   IRM 8.23
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OICC OIC (Campus) 4141(CG)     Include   IRM 8.23
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
INNSP   4141(CG) Include   Include   IRM 25.15.12
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
INNSP   4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 25.15.12
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
POSTPEN PENAP 4141(CG) Include Include Include   Use for Field Cases,
IRM 8.11.1
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
POST PEN PENAP 4031
(Campus
Only)
Include Include   Include Use for Field Cases,
IRM 8.11.1
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
CIC   4141(CG)/
4046
Include Include Include   IRM 8.7.11
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
CIC   4141(CG)/
4046 (Part 2
Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 8.7.11
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
IC   4141(CG)/
4046
Include Include Include   IRM 8.7.11
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
IC   4141(CG)/
4046 (Part 2
Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 8.7.11
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1.
EXM/TEGE EP 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 8.7.8
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE EP 4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 8.7.8
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE E0 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 8.7.8
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE EO 4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 8.7.8
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE EMPL 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 4.23.16
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE EMPL 4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 4.23.16
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE EX 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 8.7.10
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE EX 4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 8.7.10
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE ES 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 8.7.4
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE ES 4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 8.7.4
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE G 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 8.7.4
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE G 4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 8.7.4
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE I 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 8.7.8
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE I 4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
Include   Include   IRM 8.7.8
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE I 3808
(campus
S dkt)
Include   Include   Use for Campus
S Docketed,
IRM 8.7.8
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE TEFRA 4141(CG)   Include Include   IRM 8.19
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE TEFRAI 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 8.19
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
EXM/TEGE TEFRAP 4141(CG) Include Include Include   IRM 8.19
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER ABINT 4141(CG)   Include Include   IRM 8.17.6
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER ABINT 4141(CG)
(Part 2 Dkt)
    Include   IRM 8.17.6
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER TFRP 4141(CG)   Include Include   IRM 8.25
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER CAPIA NA         IRM 8.24
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER CAPLN NA         IRM 8.24
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER CAPLV NA         IRM
8.24 and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER CAPSZ NA         IRM 8.24
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER DOP 4141(CG)     Include   IRM 1.25.1
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER 7430 4141(CG)     Include   IRM 8.7.1
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER 6161 4141(CG)     Include   IRM 8.7.4
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER 6702 4141(CG)     Include   IRM 8.11
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
OTHER 6715 4141(CG)     Include   IRM 20.1
and
IRM 1.4.28.3.1
REFC   NA         NA

Exhibit 1.4.28-2 
Case Grading Factors to Consider for Exam Sourced Cases

  FACTOR GS–9/11 GS–12 GS–13 GS–14
A Factual complexity of issue Easily resolved. Facts established or easy to determine. Moderately difficult. Moderately complex factual issues in which different interpretations of fact are present or possible. Very complex or novel issues in which conflicting interpretations of facts are present.
B Impact of work unit Limited to parties and tax years involved. May affect taxpayer's interest in subsequent years and/or other related taxpayers. Consists of several related work units; and/or affects a number of taxpayers; and/or has potential for adverse impact on overall voluntary compliance; and/or has high dollar impact on others and/or work units. Affects a number of unrelated taxpayers; and/or has industry-wide implications; and/or has very high dollar impact on other work units and/or has high potential for adverse impact on overall voluntary compliance.
C Legal complexity No legal dispute involved; or legal dispute can be resolved with little or no research because legal principle is clear. Some legal research required; statutes, regulations, or judicial precedents available and usually applicable to the case. Moderately difficult. Legal research and analysis required to resolve significant legal complexities. Precedents usually available; require interpretation to apply. Extensive legal research required. Applicable law very complex. Precedents lacking or conflicting.
D Conference and negotiating skills Normal meet-and-deal skills. Basic negotiating and conference skills. Issues are controversial and other aspects of the work unit require more than basic conference and negotiating skills. Issues are controversial and other aspects of the work unit are so unique as to require exceptional conference and negotiating skills.

Exhibit 1.4.28-3 
Upgrading Exam Sourced Cases - Considerations

Upgrading Considerations
Issues or Features Frequently Requiring Upgrading to GS–14:
a. Joint Committee cases
b. Appeals Coordinated Issues
c. Life insurance company issues
d. Sections 269 and 482 issues
e. Section 531 issues
f. Complex estate tax issues
g. Complex merger, reorganization, recapitalization, spin-off, and split-off issues
h. Complex foreign corporation issues
i. Mitigation of statute of limitations (Sections 1311–1314)
j. Cases involving closing agreements
k. Cases involving tax haven issues
l. Net worth computation, bank deposit method, and other complex fraud penalty cases
m. LIFO inventory issues
n. Complex collapsible corporations
o. Issues involving related law such as Bankruptcy Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and complex State law
p. Railroad issues
q. Complex tax shelters
   
Issues or Features Frequently Requiring Upgrading to GS–13:
a. Estate tax issues
b. Most corporate issues
c. Most EP/EO issues
d. Most partnership issues
e. Trust fund recovery penalty cases
f. Foreign issues
g. Fraud cases
h. Subchapter S (S Corporation) issues
i. Moderately complex Section 274 issues
j. Moderately complex bad debt issues
k. Tax shelters
   
Issues or Features Frequently Requiring Upgrading to GS–12:
a. Scholarship or fellowship IRC 117
b. Travel as a form of education
c. Alimony
d. Compensation vs. gift from employer
e. Determination of whether expense was incurred in a trade or business or is ordinary and necessary
f. Hobby loss
g. Simple penalty cases
h. Simple depreciation cases
i. Simple investment credit
The existence of one or more of the above items does not trigger the automatic grade change of a work unit. A judgment as to whether to change the grade should be made after considering all factors in the work unit and relating them to the general characteristics set forth in Exhibit 1.4.28-2.

Exhibit 1.4.28-4 
Downgrading Exam Sourced Cases - Considerations

Downgrading Considerations
1. Where issue(s) in the work unit can be resolved by reference to a Tax Court, Circuit Court, or Supreme Court decision directly on point rendered after assignment of the work unit.
2. Where issues are conceded by the taxpayer before significant work is performed on the issues and the remaining contested portion of the proposed deficiency would merit a lower grade.
3. Where cases have issues identical to a key or pattern case that is a separate work unit.
4. Where Examination must transmit a work unit to Appeals and the same issues in previous years were disposed of on a hazards-of-litigation basis in Appeals.
5. Where issues in work units are identical to and totally dependent upon settlement of a related work unit in another Appeals office.
6. Where elimination of duplication of tax from the computed dollar size of a work unit would reduce proposed deficiency and merit a lower grade, e.g., Section 482 cases with correlative adjustments or transferee liability cases.
7. Where elimination of tax relating to issues not protested would reduce proposed deficiency and merit a lower grade.
8. Where the only issues are substantiation of a deduction and/or the legal dispute can be resolved with little or no research because the legal principle is clear and constitutes generally accepted basic tax knowledge routinely applied.
  The existence of one or more of the above items does not trigger the automatic grade change of a work unit. Make a judgment as to whether to change the grade after considering all factors of the work unit and relating them to the general characteristics in Exhibit 1.4.28-2. Exercise caution in downgrading tax shelter cases when other factors indicate that downgrading would not be appropriate. Such factors might include the sensitivity of the case or its potential impact on overall voluntary compliance.

Exhibit 1.4.28-5 
Case Grading Matrix for Collection Sourced Cases

OTHER FACTORS ADDING TO COLLECTION CASE COMPLEXITY FOR WHICH UPGRADE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED
Issue Minimum Grade
1.Real estate valuation issues 11
2.Bankruptcy / Receivership issues 11
3.Special Circumstance or Effective Tax Administration (ETA) offers 12
4.Fraud issues 12
5.IRC 6700 thru 6709 penalties 12
6. Combined Annual Wage Reporting adjustment (CAWR) 12
7.Large dollar 12
8.Case sensitivity / public policy issues 12
9.Involved title issues, involved community property, or other state law issues; multiple owners; and complex title issues considered under specific state laws 12
10.Involved asset valuation issues such as corporate ownership, trust or personal service entities, and other tangible assets, complex intangibles and contingent assets 13
11.Individual involvement in a closely held entity with commingled income/assets and involved analysis of entity’s finances is required 13
12.International issues 13
13.Transferee, nominee, or alter ego issues 13
14.Fraud issues, ATAT case only, i.e., failed to disclose off shore assets 14
COLLECTION APPEAL PROGRAM INSTALLMENT AGREEMENTS (CAPIA)
Type Issue Minimum Grade
Installment Agreement (CAPIA) 1.Denial of a request for a guaranteed or streamlined installment agreement 11
2.Proposed termination or termination of an installment agreement with an amount of $25,000 or less including any new periods 11
3.Proposed termination, termination, or denial of an installment agreement for other individuals 12
4.Proposed termination, termination, or denial of an installment agreement for sole proprietorships, partnerships, and corporations without employees or easily identified less involved issues 12
5.Proposed termination, termination, or denial of an installment agreement for sole proprietorships, partnerships, and corporations not qualifying in item 4 above 13
6.Proposed termination, termination, or denial of an installment agreement for individuals with highly complex issues such as complex intangibles, contingent assets, minority interest in personal service company, marketability discounts, pending lawsuits 13
7.Proposed termination, termination, or denial of an installment agreement for LLPs or LLCs 13
COLLECTION APPEAL PROGRAM LIEN ISSUES (CAPLN)
Type Issue Minimum Grade
Proposed liens (CAPLN) 1. Individual wage earners who may qualify for a streamlined or guaranteed installment agreement 11
2. Individual wage earners with an accepted installment agreement or an accepted Offer in Compromise 11
3. Individuals whose accounts have been placed into Currently Not Collectible status 11
4. Wage earners or individuals on a fixed income 11
5. Sole proprietors with no employees, or self employed individuals 11
6. Out of compliance in-business taxpayers 11
7. Out of business taxpayers, no trust fund taxes due 11
8. Lien related issues for all other entities not listed above except LLP and LLC 12
9. Lien issues  
•Bonding 13
•Factoring 13
•Other complex issues 13
10. LLP / LLC 13
Filed liens (CAPLN) 1. Individual wage earners who may qualify for a streamlined or guaranteed Installment Agreement 11
2. Individual wage earners with an accepted installment agreement or an accepted Offer in Compromise 11
3. Individuals whose accounts have been placed into Currently Not Collectible status 11
4. Wage earners or individuals on a fixed income 11
5. Sole proprietors with no employees, or self employed individuals 11
6. Out of compliance in business taxpayers 11
7. Out of business taxpayers, no trust fund taxes due 11
8. Release and withdrawal issues for all other entities 12
9. Lien issues:  
•Discharge 13
•Subordination 13
•Alter ego 13
•Nominee 13
•Transferee 13
•Non-attachment 13
•Title issues under community property or state laws 13
•Bonding 13
•Factoring 13
•Other complex issues. 13
10. LLP / LLC 13
COLLECTION APPEAL PROGRAM LEVY ISSUE (CAPLV)
Type Issue Minimum Grade
Proposed levies (CAPLV) 1. Levy on wage earners and others whose income is limited to fixed income, i.e., retirement annuities and social security 11
2. Levy on individuals not included in item 1, including self employed individuals and sole proprietorships without employees 12
3. Levy on all entities other than individuals including sole proprietorships with employees 13
4. Levies involving:  
•Disallowance of taxpayer’s request to return levied property under economic hardship, see IRC 6343(d) 13
•Nominees 13
•Transferees 13
•Alter ego 13
•Assets belonging to a third party 13
•Involved community property issues 13
•Disallowance of property owner’s claim to return levied property under IRC 6343 13
Issued levies (CAPLV) 1. Levy on wage earners and others whose income is limited to fixed income, i.e., retirement annuities and social security 11
2. Levy on individuals not in item one and levy on sole proprietorships 12
3. Levy on all entities other than individuals and sole proprietorships 13
4. Levies involving:  
•Nominees 13
•Transferees 13
•Alter ego 13
•Assets belonging to a third party 13
•Involved community property issues 13
•Disallowance of taxpayer’s request to return levied property under economic hardship, see IRC 6343(d) 13
•Disallowance of property owner’s claim to return levied property under IRC 6343 13
COLLECTION APPEAL PROGRAM SEIZURE (CAPSZ)
Type Issue Minimum Grade
Seizure (CAPSZ) 1. Seizure and Sale 13
2. Seizure and Sale involving significant subterfuges, tax avoidance (whipsaw assessments), abusive promoters, schemes, international issues, i.e., offshore bank accounts & foreign assets, exempt organization schemes

Note:

These are cases that come from the Abusive Tax Avoidance Transaction (ATAT) Groups

14
 
COLLECTION DUE PROCESS LEVY CASES (DPLV)
For CDP levy and lien cases (DPL2), review both DPLV and DPLN tables and use the highest appropriate grade
Type Issue Minimum Grade
DPLV 1. For DPLV cases which involve penalty appeal only and there are no other grade increasing factors, see penalty grading matrix on the Appeals home page listed under Manager Resources / Case Grading & Other Guidelines to determine appropriate grade level.  
2. Account balance previously resolved or full paid with no apparent unresolved issues. 9
3. Premature referral preparation needed to release Appeals jurisdiction. 9
4. Solely frivolous arguments in the file, Letter 4380 needs to be sent to clarify the taxpayer has no legitimate issues prior to closing as a premature referral. If the taxpayer raises non-frivolous issues the case may need to be regraded.

Note:

When both frivolous and legitimate issues are raised, the case grade case should be solely based upon the legitimate issue(s).

9
 
5. Underlying liability issue from ASFR/SFR and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. Other issues may raise the grade level. 9  
6. Underlying liability issue from Form 1040 EZ and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. Other issues may raise the grade level. 9  
7. Wage earners or individuals on a fixed income that meet streamline installment agreement criteria (including non CDP periods). 9  
8. Underlying liability issue from Form 1040 A or Form 1040 with no schedules or Schedule B only, and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 11  
9. Wage earners or individuals on a fixed income that do not meet streamline installment agreement criteria. 11  
10. Out of compliance in business taxpayers that would not qualify for a collection alternative. 11  
11. Out of business taxpayers, no trust fund taxes due. 11  
12. Self employed individuals or sole proprietors with no employees. 12  
13. Underlying liability issue from Form 1040 with schedules other than Schedule B, and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 12  
14. Sole proprietors with employees and gross receipts of $1,000,000 or less or a balance due of $250,000 or less (including non CDP periods). 12  
15. Out of business taxpayers, trust fund taxes due. 12  
16. Returns with underlying TEFRA, involved tax shelter, involved net operating losses, and international liability issue and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 13  
17. Underlying BMF liability issue and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 13  
18. Underlying TFRP liability issue and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 13  
19. Individuals involving complex tax shelters. 13  
20. Business entities in compliance (not listed elsewhere). 13  
21. Sole proprietors with employees and gross receipts of greater than $1,000,000 or a balance due greater than $250,000. 13  
22. Estates and Trusts 13  
23. LLP and LLC 13  
24. Partners in a partnership which serves as a primary source of the partner’s income. 13  
25. If CDP includes significant subterfuges, tax avoidance, abusive promoters, abusive schemes, organization schemes, international issues such as offshore bank accounts and foreign assets (Normally these cases come from an ATAT group). 14  
COLLECTION DUE PROCESS LIEN CASES (DPLN)
For CDP levy and lien cases (DPL2), review both DPLV and DPLN tables and use the highest appropriate grade
Type Issue Minimum Grade
DPLN 1. For DPLN cases which involve penalty appeal only and there are no other grade increasing factors, see penalty grading matrix on the Appeals home page listed under Manager Resources / Case Grading & Other Guidelines to determine appropriate grade level.  
2. Lien issues for wage earners that have an accepted installment agreement or Offer in Compromise as the collection alternative or whose accounts were declared Currently Not Collectible (lien filed because of the determination). 9
3. Lien issues for wage earners who qualify for a streamline or guaranteed IA. 9
4. Account balance previously resolved or full paid with no apparent unresolved issues. 9
5. Premature referral preparation needed to release Appeals jurisdiction. 9
6. Solely frivolous arguments in the file, Letter 4380 needs to be sent to clarify the taxpayer has no legitimate issues prior to closing as a premature referral. If the taxpayer raises non-frivolous issues the case may need to be regraded.

Note:

When both frivolous and legitimate issues are raised, the case grade case should be solely based upon the legitimate issue(s).

9
 
7. Underlying liability issue from ASFR/SFR and TP can raise the liability issue. Other issues may raise the grade level. 9  
8. Underlying liability issue from Form 1040 EZ and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. Other issues may raise the grade level. 9  
9. Wage earners or individuals on a fixed income that meet streamline installment agreement criteria (including non CDP periods). 9  
10. Underlying BMF liability issue and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 11  
11. Individuals who have a rejected installment agreement or Offer in Compromise. 11  
12. Underlying liability issue from Form 1040 A and Form 1040 with no schedules or schedule B and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 11  
13. Wage earners or individuals on a fixed income that do not meet streamline installment agreement criteria. 11  
14. Sole proprietors with no employees, or self employed. 11  
15. Out of compliance in-business taxpayers. 11  
16. Out of business taxpayers, no trust fund taxes due. 11  
17. Underlying liability issue from Form 1040 with more schedules than Schedule B and the taxpayer can raise the liability. 12  
18. Out of business taxpayers, trust fund taxes due. 12  
19. Sole proprietors with employees and gross receipts of $1,000,000 or less or a balance due of $250,000 or less (including non CDP periods). 12  
20. Underlying TFRP liability issue and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 13  
21. Underlying TEFRA, involved tax shelter, involved net operating losses, or international liability issue and the taxpayer can raise the liability issue. 13  
22. Individuals involving complex tax shelters. 13  
23. Corporations 13  
24. Partnerships 13  
25. Sole proprietors with employees and gross receipts of greater than $1,000,000 or a balance due greater than $250,000 (including non CDP periods). 13  
26. Estates and Trusts 13  
27. LLP and LLC 13  
28. Partners in a partnership which serves as a primary source of income. 13  
29. Complex community property issues or complex title issues considered under specific state laws. 13  
30. Transferee, nominee, or alter ego issues. 13  
31. If CDP includes significant subterfuges, tax avoidance, abusive promoters, abusive schemes, exempt organization schemes, or international issues, such as offshore bank accounts and foreign assets. 14  
OFFER IN COMPROMISE (OIC)
Type Issue Minimum Grade
Basic guidelines for Doubt as to Collectibility offer cases 1. Offers from individuals with the liabilities limited to:  
•Personal income tax 11
•Penalties – all, including TFRP 11
•Employment taxes owed by a sole proprietor (with no current Form 941 requirements) 11
•A self employed individual without a Form 941 filing requirement 11
With the following restrictions:  
•Interest in real estate is limited to a personal residence owned by the parties to the offer and  
•All periods are jointly owed if a joint offer  
2. Offers with individuals with liability from:  
•Sole proprietors with employees and gross receipts of $1,000,000 or less or $250,000 or less balance due (including non CDP periods) 12
•Self employed with a Form 941 filing requirement 12
•Previously self employed but currently unemployed 12
•Out of business companies 12
•Individuals not qualifying under item 1 above 12
3. Special Circumstance or Effective Tax Administration (ETA) offers (*minimum grade). 12*
4. Offers from:  
•Individuals involving complex tax shelters 13
•Corporations 13
•Partnerships 13
•Sole proprietors with employees and gross receipts of greater than $1,000,000 or a balance due greater than $250,000 13
•Estates and Trusts 13
•LLP and LLC 13
•Partners in a partnership which serves as a primary source of income 13
5. Offers involving pending lawsuits, assets needing expert appraisals, marketability discounts (other than personal residence). 13
6. Offers including:  
•Significant subterfuges 14
•Tax avoidance 14
•Abusive promoters 14
•Schemes (whipsaw assessments) 14
•International issues i.e., offshore bank accounts and foreign assets (Normally these are cases which come from an ATAT Group 14
Basic guidelines for Doubt as to Liability offer cases Trust Fund Recovery Penalty liability offers. 13
MISCELLANEOUS OTHER ISSUES
Type Issue Minimum Grade
Timeliness determinations Timeliness determinations 9
Feature code JL Jeopardy levy 13
Trust Fund Recovery Penalty – Timely, TBOR2 Willfulness / Responsibility 13
Trust Fund Recovery Penalty - Claim Willfulness / Responsibility 13

Exhibit 1.4.28-6 
Case Grading Criteria for Tax Computation Specialist Work Assignments

TCS Case Grading Criteria - IRM 1.4.28.7.4
   
GRADE 9 WORK ASSIGNMENTS
Individual Tax Returns with the Following Issues:
a. Itemized Deductions
b. Individual Business Schedules
c. Capital Transactions
d. Amortization and Depreciation Computations
e. Community Property Splits*
f. Foreign Tax Credit Computations (Individuals)
Other Non-Corporate Returns including:
a. Fiduciary Income Tax Returns
b. Employment Tax Returns
c. Excise Tax Returns
Basic Interest Computations
Restricted Interest Computations*
Interest Abatement Cases
Penalty Appeals Cases
Rule 155 Computations*
Recomputations for Refund Litigation Cases*
Review/Preparation of Appeals Closing Records, Forms 5403, etc.
TEFRA Computations and Procedures*
Preparation/Draft of Statutory Notice of Deficiency on Office Audit Cases
Problem Resolution Program Cases*
Other Work Less Complex than Grade 11 Examples
   
* These assignments should include only simple cases of limited scope and complexity.
   
GRADE 11 WORK ASSIGNMENTS
Individual Tax Returns
Corporate Tax Returns, including:
a. Basic Personal Holding Companies
b. Basic Accumulated Earnings Tax
Foreign Tax Credit (Individuals)
Jeopardy and Termination Assessments
Sections 1245 and 1250 Problems
Employment Tax Returns
Carrybacks and Carryovers
Estate and Gift Tax Returns
Fiduciary Returns
Excise Tax Returns
Partnership Returns
Employee Plans (Other than Complex Chapter 43 Computations)
Exempt Organizations (Other than Complex Chapter 42 Computations)
Bankruptcy Case
Problem Resolution Program Cases
Interest Abatement Computations
Restricted Interest Computations
   
GRADE 12 WORK ASSIGNMENTS
Corporate Investment and Foreign Tax Credit
Joint Committee Case Computations
Consolidated Corporations
Recapitalizations
Liquidations
Section 482 Allocations
Specialized Industry Computations
Changes in Accounting Methods
Complex Estate Tax Computations
Complex Jeopardy and Termination Assessments
Complex Personal Holding Companies
Complex Accumulated Earnings Computations
Earnings and Profits Determinations
Refund Litigation
Complex Carrybacks and Carryovers
Indirect Methods of Income Reconstruction
Transferor-Transferee Case
Any Case Requiring Extensive Technical Research of Computational Statutory Provisions
TEFRA Computations and Processing
Complex Chapter 43 Computations (Employee Plans)
Complex Chapter 42 Computations (Exempt Organizations)
Interrelated Entities
   
GRADE 13 WORK ASSIGNMENTS
Multinational Interrelated Tax Computations
Complex Specialized Industry Computations
Complex Large Case Computations
Highly Unusual, Unique or Sensitive Cases

Exhibit 1.4.28-7 
Case Grading Matrix for Art Appraisal Services Cases

Art Appraisal Services Case Grading Matrix
Factor GS 9-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14
Appraisal Complexity Clear comparables readily available. Comparables available but interpretation required. Comparables not readily available (market thin or seldom traded, few outside experts exist) No comparables available, (interpolation or extrapolation of partial comparables needed)
Little or no interpretation needed. Appraisal research may be required. Appraisal research required. Extensive research required.
Provenance established. Provenance established with appropriate research. More than one art specialty involved. Multiple or complex specialty areas involved.
Panel review not needed. Minimal Panel review needed. Advanced appraisal issues present such as blockage discounts, fractional interests, and/or cloudy provenance. Advanced appraisal issues present such as blockage discounts, fractional interests, and/or cloudy provenance.
Use of external resources (libraries, galleries, private sales data, other specialists, etc.) Extensive use of external resources (libraries, galleries, private sales data, other specialists, etc.)
Factual/Legal Complexity No factual or legal issues present. Factual or legal issues present which can be resolved with minimal research. Factual or legal issues present which require substantial research to resolve such as complex ownership arrangements or title histories. Multiple factual and/or legal complexities such as questions of title, potential for fraud, or valuation over/ understatement of penalties.
Impact No impact beyond the immediate case. Appraisal result impacts other taxpayers or tax entities such as heirs' income tax returns or the appraisers' credibility. Appraisal result impacts other taxpayers or tax entities. Case may be related to the development of important valuation principles or compliance trends. Appraisal has potential to impact multiple taxpayers on a national scale.
  Case may contribute to the development of important valuation, legal, and/or compliance precedents.

More Internal Revenue Manual