BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney YOSHINORI H. T. HIMEL #66194 Assistant United States Attorney Eastern District of California 501 I Street, Suite 10-100 Sacramento, California 95814-2322 Telephone: (916) 554-2760
MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE: I.R.S. SUMMONS ENFORCEMENT MATTHEW R. LONSDALE
This matter came before me on March 14, 2012, under the Order to Show Cause filed January 26, 2012. That order, with the verified petition and exhibits, was served on respondent in conformity with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e) on February 7, 2012. Dckt. No. 4. Yoshinori H. T. Himel and Revenue Officer Sireen Michael appeared for petitioners. Respondent did not file an opposition, but did appear at the hearing and had no objection to the Summons. Respondent agreed in open court to appear at the I.R.S. offices at 4330 Watt Avenue, Sacramento, California 95821, before Revenue Officer Sireen Michael, or her designated representative, on April 26, 2012, at 10:00 a.m., to comply with the summonses.
The Verified Petition to Enforce Internal Revenue Service Summons initiating this proceeding seeks to enforce two administrative summonses (Exhibit A to the petition) in aid of Revenue Officer Michael's investigation of Matthew R. Lonsdale. The first summons is to ascertain facts relevant to the collection of amounts delinquent under the federal tax laws for the taxable years ending December 31, 2001, December 31, 2002, December 31, 2003, and December 31, 2007. The second summons is to determine the existence and amounts of U.S. individual income tax liabilities for the taxable years ending December 31, 2004, December 31, 2005, December 31, 2006, December 31, 2008, December 31, 2009, and December 31, 2010.
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.). 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 Michael and the entire record, I make the following findings:
(1) The summonses issued by Revenue Officer Sireen Michael to respondent, Matthew Lonsdale, on July 28, 2011, seeking testimony and production of documents and records in respondent's possession, were issued in good faith and for a legitimate purpose under I.R.C. § 7602, that is, to ascertain facts relevant to the collection of amounts delinquent under the federal tax laws for the taxable years ending December 31, 2001, December 31, 2002, December 31, 2003, and December 31, 2007, and to determine the existence and amounts of U.S. individual income tax liabilities for the taxable years ending December 31, 2004, December 31, 2005, December 31, 2006, December 31, 2008, December 31, 2009, and December 31, 2010.
(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, Matthew Lonsdale, to rebut that prima facie showing.
(8) Respondent presented no argument or evidence to rebut the prima facie showing.
I therefore recommend that the IRS summonses issued to respondent, Matthew Lonsdale, be enforced, and that respondent be ordered to appear at the I.R.S. offices at 4330 Watt Avenue, Sacramento, California, 95821, before Revenue Officer Sireen Michael, or her designated representative, on April 26, 2012, at 10:00 a.m., as agreed in open court on March 14, 2012, or at a later date and time to be set in writing by Revenue Officer Michael, then and there to be sworn, to give testimony, and to produce for examining and copying the books, checks, records, papers and other data demanded by the summons, the examination to continue from day to day until completed.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) and Rule 304 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be titled "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The District Judge will then review these findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § ...