ORDER ENFORCING I.R.S. SUMMONS Taxpayer: ROBERT J. PRATT
This matter came before me on July 18, 2008, under the Amended Order to Show Cause filed June 13, 2008, which ordered the respondent, Robert J. Pratt, to show cause why the I.R.S. summons issued to him on February 12, 2008, should not be enforced. This Order, along with the verified petition and exhibits, was personally served on respondent on June 24, 2008. Todd Pickles, Assistant United States Attorney, appeared for petitioners, and petitioning Revenue Officer Charles Duff was present. Respondent did not file an opposition, but was present at the hearing. The action was reassigned from the District Judge to me for final judgment after the parties filed Consents to Jurisdiction of United States Magistrate Judge.
The Verified Petition to Enforce Internal Revenue Service Summons initiating this proceeding seeks to enforce an administrative summons (Exhibit A to the petition) in aid Revenue Officer Duff's investigation for collection of respondent's assessed tax for individual Federal income tax from the year ending December 31, 2002. Subject matter jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1340 and 1345, and is found to be proper. Authorization for the action is under I.R.C. §§ 7402(b) and 7604(a) (26 U.S.C.).
On the merits, the Order to Show Cause shifted to respondent the burden of rebutting any of the four requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964). I have reviewed the petition and documents in support. Based on the uncontroverted verification of Revenue Officer Duff and the entire record, I make the following findings:
(1) The summons issued by Revenue Officer Charles Duff to respondent Robert J. Pratt, on February 12, 2008, seeking testimony and production of documents and records in respondent's possession, was issued in good faith and for a legitimate purpose under I.R.C. § 7602, that is, to determine financial information for the collection of assessed Federal income tax for the year ending December 31, 2002.
(2) The information sought is relevant to that purpose.
(3) The information sought is not already in the possession of the Internal Revenue Service.
(4) The administrative steps required by the Internal Revenue Code have been followed.
(5) There is no evidence of referral of this case by the Internal Revenue Service to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.
(6) The verified petition and its exhibits made a prima facie showing of satisfaction of the requirements of United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).
(7) The burden shifted to respondent, Robert J. Pratt, to rebut that prima facie showing.
(8) Respondent presented no argument or evidence to rebut the prima facie showing.
Accordingly, I hereby ORDER as follows:
1. The I.R.S. summons issued to respondent, Robert J. Pratt, is ENFORCED.
2. Respondent Robert J. Pratt is ORDERED to appear at the I.R.S. offices at 4330 Watt Avenue, Sacramento, California, 95821, before Revenue Officer Charles Duff or his designated representative, on August 28, 2008, then and there to be sworn, to give testimony, and to produce for examining and copying the books, checks, records, papers and other ...