- Which of the following correctly describes the refund claim?
Answer: No refund is allowable because the 2021 withholding is deemed paid on April 15, 2022, and that payment is outside the three-year lookback period before the June 20, 2025 claim.
Under IRC §6511(b)(2)(A), when a claim is filed within three years after the return is filed, the refund is limited to amounts paid during the three years immediately before the claim. Wage withholding for 2021 is deemed paid on April 15, 2022 under IRC §6513(b)(1), which is more than three years before June 20, 2025. Choice B ignores the lookback limitation. Choice C misapplies the no-return two-year rule; once a return is filed, the filing-date alternative can apply, but it does not make the old withholding refundable. Choice D incorrectly states the no-return two-year rule as running from the original due date rather than from the time the tax was paid.
- Which of the following is correct regarding the collection statute expiration date (CSED) while the CDP matter is pending?
Answer: The CSED is suspended while the CDP hearing and any appeals are pending, and it cannot expire before the 90th day after the final determination.
IRC § 6330(e)(1) and Treas. Reg. § 301.6330-1(g). The running of the IRC § 6502 collection period is suspended while a timely requested CDP hearing and any appeals are pending, and in no event does the period expire before the 90th day after the final determination. The suspension begins with the hearing request, not with the levy notice. Because the original CSED of June 1, 2025, would otherwise have passed during the hearing, the IRS has at least 90 days after the final determination to collect. Choice C is correct. Choice A is wrong because § 6330(e)(1) suspends the collection period itself, not only levy. Choice B is wrong because it starts the suspension at the levy notice rather than the request and omits the 90-day floor. Choice D is wrong because it conditions the suspension on bankruptcy, which is a separate suspension rule.
- Which of the following is correct regarding the time limits for filing a claim for refund of 2025 income tax?
Answer: A refund claim filed within three years after the return was filed is limited to tax paid during the three years immediately before the claim was filed, plus the period of any extension of time for filing.
Governing authority: IRC § 6511(a) and (b)(2)(A); § 6513(a) and (b)(1). A claim must generally be filed within three years after the return was filed or two years after the tax was paid, whichever is later. A claim filed within the three-year period may recover only tax paid during the three years immediately before the claim, plus the period of any extension of time for filing. Choice A is correct. Choice B misstates the no-return rule: when no return was filed, the claim must be filed within two years after the tax was paid, not three. Choice C misstates the deemed-filing rule: a return filed during an extension is filed on the date it is actually filed, and the three-year period runs from that date; only a return filed before the due date is deemed filed on the due date (§ 6513(a)). Choice D misstates the deemed-payment rule: income tax withheld from wages is deemed paid on the unextended due date of the return, not on the actual filing date (§ 6513(b)(1)).
- Which of the following is correct regarding a statutory notice of deficiency mailed by the IRS for 2025 income tax?
Answer: A notice mailed by certified or registered mail to the taxpayer's last known address is valid even if never received, and the taxpayer has 90 days from the date of mailing to file a Tax Court petition.
IRC § 6212(a)-(b) and § 6213(a). Choice B is correct: a notice of deficiency is valid when mailed by certified or registered mail to the taxpayer's last known address, the taxpayer has 90 days from the date of mailing to file a Tax Court petition, and receipt of the notice is not required to start the period. Choice A misstates the effect of a timely petition: under § 6213(a), the IRS may not assess the deficiency during the 90-day period or, if a petition is filed, until the Tax Court's decision becomes final. Choice C misstates the foreign-address period: it is 150 days, not 180. Choice D misstates the consequence of a notice mailed after the assessment period expires: the notice still confers Tax Court jurisdiction, and the taxpayer may plead the expiration of the period of limitations as a defense, so payment and a refund claim is not the only remedy.
- Which of the following is correct regarding the IRS's adjustment of a 2025 return for a mathematical or clerical error?
Answer: The IRS may assess the additional tax without issuing a notice of deficiency, but the taxpayer has 60 days after the error notice is mailed to request abatement, and the IRS must grant a timely request.
IRC § 6213(b). Choice D is correct: mathematical and clerical errors are excepted from the deficiency procedures, so the IRS may summarily assess the resulting tax, but it must notify the taxpayer of the error, and the taxpayer has 60 days from the mailing of the notice to request abatement, which the IRS must grant on a timely request. Choice A misstates the remedy: the math-error notice is not a statutory notice of deficiency, so the 90-day Tax Court petition procedure does not apply; the proper response is the 60-day abatement request. Choice B misstates the exception: no notice of deficiency is required before assessing a mathematical or clerical error. Choice C misstates the deadline: the abatement request must be filed within 60 days, not 30.
- Which of the following is correct regarding a taxpayer's Collection Due Process (CDP) rights for a proposed levy to collect 2025 income tax?
Answer: A taxpayer who requests a hearing after the 30-day period but within one year of the CDP notice is entitled to an equivalent hearing; the IRS is not required to suspend collection while the equivalent hearing is pending.
IRC §§ 6330 and 6331(d); Treas. Reg. §301.6330-1(i). Choice B is correct: a hearing request filed after the 30-day period but within one year of the CDP notice entitles the taxpayer to an equivalent hearing, and the IRS is not required to suspend collection while that hearing is pending. Choice A misstates the review deadline: a petition to the Tax Court challenging a CDP determination must be filed within 30 days of the determination, not 90. Choice C drops the exception to the liability-challenge rule: the underlying liability may be challenged at a CDP hearing only if the taxpayer did not receive a statutory notice of deficiency or otherwise have an opportunity to dispute it. Choice D misstates the pre-levy notice period: § 6331(d) requires written notice at least 30 days before the first levy, not 60.
- Which of the following is correct regarding interest paid by the IRS on a refund of 2025 income tax?
Answer: No interest is owed if the refund is issued within 45 days after the later of the unextended due date or the filing date; otherwise interest generally runs from the date of the overpayment.
Governing authority: IRC § 6611(b) and (e)-(f). No interest is allowed if the IRS refunds the overpayment within 45 days after the last day prescribed for filing the return (without regard to extensions) or, for a return filed after that date, within 45 days after the return is filed (§ 6611(e)(1)). Otherwise, interest runs from the date of the overpayment (§ 6611(b)(2)), but for a return filed after its due date, determined with regard to extensions, no interest is allowed for any day before the return is filed (§ 6611(b)(3)). Choice C is correct. Choice A misstates the touchstone for an early-filed return: the 45 days run from the due date, not from the earlier filing date. Choice B misstates the general rule: the 45-day rule can eliminate interest entirely, and a late return earns no interest for days before it is filed. Choice D misstates the carryback rule: an overpayment from a net operating loss carryback is deemed made no earlier than the filing date (the unextended due date) of the return for the year in which the loss arose (§ 6611(f)(1), (f)(4)(A)), not the carryback year.
- Which of the following is correct regarding the taxpayer's procedural rights?
Answer: A timely request for Appeals consideration generally keeps the case in Appeals and delays issuance of a statutory notice of deficiency until the Appeals process concludes.
IRS Pub. 5 describes the preliminary Appeals opportunity in a 30-day letter; IRC §6212(a) authorizes the statutory notice of deficiency that may follow if the case is not resolved in Appeals. Choice A is correct: a timely request for Appeals consideration generally keeps the case in Appeals and postpones issuance of the statutory notice of deficiency. Choice B is wrong because prepayment is not a prerequisite to an Appeals conference. Choice C confuses the 30-day letter with the statutory notice of deficiency. Choice D is wrong because a taxpayer who fails to respond to the 30-day letter may still receive a statutory notice and petition the Tax Court within 90 days of that notice.
- Which of the following is correct regarding the taxpayer's request?
Answer: The request is not timely for a CDP hearing, but the taxpayer may receive an equivalent hearing; an equivalent hearing does not suspend collection action while it is pending.
Under IRC § 6330(a)(3)(B), a request for a CDP hearing after a notice of intent to levy must be made within the 30-day period beginning the day after the date of the notice. The notice was dated February 3, 2025, so the 30-day period ended March 5, 2025; the Form 12153 was submitted March 17, 2025. A taxpayer who misses that deadline may request an equivalent hearing within one year of the notice date. The statutory suspension in IRC § 6330(e) applies to a timely CDP hearing, not to an equivalent hearing, and the Form 12153 instructions confirm that an equivalent hearing does not suspend collection action. Thus Choice B is correct. Choice A is wrong because the period runs from the date of the notice sent to the last known address, not from actual receipt or review. Choice C is wrong because an equivalent hearing is precisely the remedy for a late CDP request made within one year. Choice D is wrong because the 150-day period is for a Tax Court petition after a notice of deficiency for taxpayers outside the United States; it does not apply to a § 6330 hearing request.
- Which of the following is correct regarding the judicial forums available to a taxpayer who disagrees with a federal income tax deficiency?
Answer: The Tax Court may redetermine a deficiency without the taxpayer first paying the tax, but only if the taxpayer files a petition within the prescribed period after the IRS mails a statutory notice of deficiency.
IRC § 6213(a) and § 7422(a). Choice C is correct: the Tax Court is a prepayment forum, so it may redetermine a deficiency before the tax is paid if the taxpayer files a timely petition after a statutory notice of deficiency. Choice A misstates the full-payment rule: a refund suit in a district court requires payment of the full assessed tax, not just the disputed portion (Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145). Choice B misstates the claim prerequisite: filing a claim for refund with the IRS is a jurisdictional prerequisite for refund suits in both the district court and the Court of Federal Claims. Choice D misstates the consequence of not petitioning the Tax Court: the taxpayer may pay the assessed tax and pursue a refund claim and suit without demonstrating reasonable cause for failing to petition.
- Which of the following best describes the taxpayer's procedural position?
Answer: She may request an equivalent hearing within the applicable one-year window, but the IRS is not required to suspend collection while that hearing is pending.
IRC §6330(a)(3)(B) gives a taxpayer only 30 days after a Notice of Intent to Levy to request a collection due process hearing. Because the request here came 42 days after the notice, the CDP hearing right was lost. Under Treas. Reg. §301.6330-1(i)(1), the taxpayer may seek an equivalent hearing during the equivalent-hearing window, but such a hearing does not suspend collection. Choice A is incorrect because the Tax Court generally obtains jurisdiction over collection matters through a petition for review of a CDP determination, not before one exists. Choice B is incorrect because an equivalent hearing is still available after the CDP period expires. Choice C is incorrect because a late Form 12153 request does not create a CDP hearing or trigger the CDP suspension.
- Absent any other exception, what is the last day on which the IRS may assess the additional tax attributable to the omitted fee?
Answer: April 15, 2031, because the omitted fee exceeds 25 percent of reported gross income and the six-year period runs from the deemed filing date.
Under IRC §6501(e)(1)(A), the assessment period is extended to six years if the taxpayer omits gross income in excess of 25 percent of the gross income stated on the return. The omitted $60,000 is 40 percent of the $150,000 reported, and there was no disclosure. Because the return was filed before the due date, IRC §6501(b)(1) treats it as filed on April 15, 2025; six years from that date is April 15, 2031. Choice A uses the actual filing date. Choice B incorrectly applies only the ordinary three-year period. Choice C misstates the statutory comparison, which is to gross income, not tax.
- Which of the following is correct regarding the period of limitations on assessment for 2025 income tax?
Answer: The IRS generally must assess additional tax within three years after the return is filed; the period is six years if the return omits more than 25 percent of the gross income stated in the return.
IRC § 6501(a), (c), and (e)(1). Choice D is correct: the general assessment period is three years after the return is filed, and the period is six years when the return omits more than 25 percent of gross income. Choice A misstates the fraud rule: a false or fraudulent return with intent to evade tax has no period of limitation. Choice B misstates the nonfiling rule: if no return is filed, the IRS may assess at any time; six years is the substantial-omission period, not the nonfiling period. Choice C misstates the measuring date: the six-year period runs from the date the return was filed, not from the date the IRS discovers the omission.
- If the taxpayer wants to contest the deficiency in the Tax Court, by what date must the petition be filed?
Answer: January 29, 2026, because the 90-day period runs from the mailing date, and the date the taxpayer opened the notice is irrelevant.
IRC §§ 6212(b) and 6213(a). A taxpayer has 90 days after a statutory notice of deficiency is mailed to petition the Tax Court, and a notice mailed to the last known address is valid even if the taxpayer does not read it. The 150-day period applies only to a notice addressed to a person outside the United States, and she was living at the Ohio address. Ninety days after October 31, 2025, is Thursday, January 29, 2026. Choice C is correct. Choice A is wrong because it uses a 30-day period, which is not the petition period. Choice B is wrong because the period runs from mailing, not from when the taxpayer opened the notice. Choice D is wrong because the petition deadline has nothing to do with the return filing deadline.
- Absent any exception, by what date must the IRS generally assess any additional 2024 income tax?
Answer: November 10, 2028, because a return filed after the extended due date starts the assessment period on the actual filing date.
Under IRC §6501(a), the IRS generally must assess tax within 3 years after the return is filed. Because the return was filed on November 10, 2025, after both the original and extended due dates, the period runs from that actual filing date and expires November 10, 2028. Choice A incorrectly uses the original due date; a return filed late is not deemed filed on the original due date. Choice C incorrectly treats the extended due date as the filing date. Choice D is wrong because a late-filed nonfraudulent return still has a limitations period; the no-limitation rule applies to situations such as a false or fraudulent return or no return.
