|
|
||
|
|
||
                              
|
Certificate of Subordination | |
|
[2000-2 USTC ¶50,638] Darlene Kugler, Executrix of the Estate of Ernest
J. Kugler, Jr., Plaintiff v. United States of America, Defendant
STANDISH,
District Judge: In
this civil action, plaintiff asserts a cause of action pursuant to
26 U.S.C. §7433. 1
Plaintiff alleges that defendant, acting through the employees and
agents of the Internal Revenue Service ( II. The
procedural and factual history of this case can be summarized as
follows: Plaintiff
is the widow of Ernest J. Kugler, Jr. and she is the executrix of
his estate. Defendant In
1981, 1982, 1984, and 1986 through 1995, plaintiff and Mr. Kugler
were unable to pay individual income taxes. In addition, Mr.
Kugler incurred sole proprietorship liabilities stemming from his
business. Plaintiff
and Mr. Kugler filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy for the years 1990
and 1993. In 1993, plaintiff and Mr. Kugler, in an effort to
satisfy their tax liability, agreed to make monthly payments over
a five year period to the The
By
March of 1997, the Kugler's tax liability had increased to
approximately $157,000.00. The majority of that liability was
comprised of accrued interest and penalties. Subsequently, the On
May 15, 1997, plaintiff attended a meeting with the On
April 6, 1999, plaintiff filed a complaint in the present case. In
response to the complaint, defendant filed a motion to dismiss. On
December 27, 1999, this court granted defendant's motion and
dismissed plaintiff's complaint without prejudice to her right to
file an amended complaint on or before January 7, 2000. Plaintiff
filed her amended complaint on January 7, 2000.
A
motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction,
pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), tests the power of a court to
hear the particular type of claim asserted by a plaintiff. On a
defendant's Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss, the plaintiff
has the burden of showing jurisdiction exists. Kehr Packages,
Inc. v. Fidelcor, Inc., 926 F.2d 1406, 1409 (3rd Cir. 1991).
In deciding a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction, the court may consider the pleadings and evidence
outside the pleadings. Mortensen v. First Federal Sav. &
Loan Ass'n, 549 F.2d 884, 891 (3rd Cir. 1977). Also, the court
may "weigh the evidence and satisfy itself as to its power to
hear the case." Mortensen, 549 F.2d at 891. B A
motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), tests the sufficiency of a complaint. See
Kost v. Kozakiewicz, 1 F.3d 176, 183 (3d Cir. 1993). In
deciding a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), the
court accepts as true the facts pleaded in the complaint and any
reasonable inferences derived from those facts. Unger v. Nat'l
Residents Matching Program, 928 F.2d 1392, 1400 (3d Cir.
1991). Additionally, the court is to construe the complaint in the
light most favorable to the plaintiff. Colburn v. Upper Darby
Twp., 838 F.2d 663, 665 (3d Cir. 1988), cert. denied,
489 U.S. 1065 (1989). However, the court is not required to accept
as true legal conclusions or unwarranted factual inferences. Resolution
Trust Corp. v. Farmer, 823 F.Supp. 302, 305 (E.D. Pa. 1993)
(citation omitted). IV. An
analysis of plaintiff's claims begins with consideration of Title
26, United States Code, Section 7433. Section 7433 provides in
pertinent part as follows: §7433.
Civil damages for certain unauthorized collection actions (a)
In general.--If, in connection with any collection of Federal tax
with respect to a taxpayer, any officer or employee of the
Internal Revenue Service recklessly or intentionally disregards
any provision of this title, or any regulation promulgated under
this title, such taxpayer may bring a civil action for damages
against the United States in a district court of the United
States. Except as provided in section 7432, such civil action
shall be the exclusive remedy for recovering damages resulting
from such actions. 26 U.S.C. §7433(a). Plaintiff's amended complaint refers to
the conduct of Revenue Officer John Marker, conduct allegedly
evincing a reckless or intentional disregard of Treasury
Regulation §301.6325-1(d), as the primary basis for her cause of
action under 26 U.S.C. §7433. In
support of its motion to dismiss, defendant presents two
arguments. First, defendant argues that the cited regulation
contains no procedural framework that would include
recommendations from a Revenue Officer. Second, defendant argues
that any action taken by a district officer with respect to
issuing a certificate of subordination is discretionary in nature,
precluding a finding of reckless or intentional disregard of the
IRC or Treasury Regulations. In
response, plaintiff argues that Mr. Marker's Treasury
Regulation §301.6325-1(d) sets forth the procedure for applying
for a certificate of subordination. §301.6325-1
Release of lien or discharge of property. (d)
Subordination of lien (4)
Application for certificate of subordination. Any person desiring
a certificate of subordination under this paragraph shall submit
an application therefor in writing to the district director
responsible for the collection of the tax. The application shall
contain such information as the district director may require. Treas. Reg. §301.6325-1(d)(4). Plaintiff
concedes that neither she nor Mr. Kugler submitted a written
application to the district director as required by the
regulation. (Amended Complaint ¶41(f)); (Br. at 7). However,
plaintiff argues as follows: .
. . based upon the Treasury Regulation and the related Revenue
Procedure, the District Director has the discretionary authority
to grant or issue a certificate of subordination. It is also
apparent that a Revenue Officer does not have discretionary
authority to recommend or deny the issuing of a certificate of
subordination. This is the gist of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. (Br. at 6). The
court agrees with plaintiff's argument that the regulation does
not permit a revenue officer to deny a written application for a
certificate of subordination. However, it does not follow that
plaintiff has stated a claim upon which relief can be granted. The
district director cannot exercise her discretionary authority to
issue a certificate of subordination unless an applicant submits a
written application to her. It is not possible to conceive how Mr.
Marker usurped the district director's discretionary authority
when the district director had no authority to issue a certificate
in plaintiff's case because plaintiff never submitted a written
application to her. Moreover,
plaintiff's "request" for a certificate of
subordination, a request made to Mr. Marker, was either oral or
written. If oral, Mr. Marker could not have usurped the district
director's discretionary authority to issue a certificate of
subordination because that authority extends only to written
applications. A
similar result obtains from a written application improperly filed
with Mr. Marker. Setting aside that the fact that any written
application was improperly filed with the revenue officer, the
court observes that plaintiff's amended complaint accurately
alleges that Mr. Marker indicated in his letter dated It
is clear from the foregoing that Mr. Marker did not act in
reckless or intentional disregard to any provision of the IRC or
the regulations promulgated thereunder. Accordingly, the court
will grant defendant's motion to dismiss. 3 An
order follows. 1 Plaintiff's complaint is comprised of two counts. Count I is
designated as a wrongful death action "to recover damages for
the wrongful death of Ernest J. Kugler, Jr. pursuant to the
provisions of 42 Pa. C.S. §8301 . . . and to recover damages on
behalf of the Estate of Ernest J. Kugler, Jr. pursuant to the
provisions of 42 Pa. C.S. §8302." (Amended Complaint ¶¶33-34).
Count II is designed as a survival action in which plaintiff seeks
"damages pursuant to the provisions of 42 Pa. C.S. §8302."
(Amended Complaint ¶49). However, it is clear that plaintiff's
cause of action falls under Section 7433 of the IRC and not
Pennsylvania's Wrongful Death and Survival statutes. (See
Amended Complaint ¶4, stating that "[t]his is an action by
the Plaintiff against the United States of America acting through
the officers and employees of the Department of the Treasury,
Internal Revenue Service alleging unauthorized tax collection
activities pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §7433 which resulted in the
wrongful death of Ernest J. Kugler, Jr.). 2 To the extent that plaintiff complains of Mr. Marker's
failure to forward the Kuglers' request to the district director,
plaintiff's claim is not one upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff
has cited no clause of Treasury Regulation §301.6325-1(d) or any
other Treasury Regulation that requires revenue officers to
forward improperly-filed written applications to the district
director. Thus, even if plaintiff submitted a written application,
Mr. Marker's failure to forward that application is not actionable
conduct. 3 In addition to her claim based upon Mr. Marker's alleged
usurpation of the district director's discretionary authority to
issue a certificate of subordination, plaintiff asserts a claim
based upon the Kuglers' inability to submit an offer in compromise
to the Revenue Procedure 68-8 1,
1968-1 CB 754 [Text]
This
Revenue Procedure contains the information which is required by a
district director in an application by any person for
subordination of a tax lien under section 6325(d)(1) or (2) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1954. Pursuant
to section 6325(d)(1) of the Code and paragraph (c)(1) of section
400.2-1 of the Temporary Regulations, T.D. 6944, page 854, this
Bulletin, under the Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966, P.L. 89-719, C.B.
1966-2, 623, a district director may, in his discretion, issue a
certificate of subordination of any lien imposed under chapter 64
of the Code upon any part of the property subject to the lien if
there is paid over to the district director an amount equal to the
amount of the lien or interest to which the certificate
subordinates the lien of the United States. Pursuant to section
6325(d)(2) of the Code and paragraph (c)(2) of section 400.2-1 of
the regulations a district director may, in his discretion, issue
a certificate of subordination of any lien imposed under chapter
64 of the Code upon any property subject to the lien if the
district director believes that the subordination of the lien will
ultimately result in an increase in the amount realizable by the
United States from the property subject to the lien and will
facilitate the ultimate collection of the tax liability. Any
person desiring a certificate of subordination under paragraph
(c)(1) or (2) of section 400.2-1 of the regulations shall submit a
written application, containing the information set forth in
section 4 of this Revenue Procedure, in triplicate to the district
director (marked for the attention of the chief, special
procedures section) responsible for the collection of the tax,
declaring that the application is made under penalties of perjury
and requesting that the certificate be issued. .01
The name and address of the applicant, the name and address of the
taxpayer, and the family relationship, if any, of the applicant to
the taxpayer. .02
Whether the certificate of subordination is sought under paragraph
(c)(1) (relating to payment of amount of subordination) or
paragraph (c)(2) (relating to facilitating tax collection) of
section 400.2-1 of the regulations. .03
A detailed description, including location, of the property with
respect to which the certificate is sought (in the case of real
property, the street address, city, and State and the same
description as is contained in the title or deed to the property). .04
A copy of each Notice of Federal Tax Lien (Form 668) affecting the
property, or the following information with respect to each such
Notice of Federal Tax Lien: (1) The internal revenue district named thereon, (2) The name and address of the taxpayer, and (3) The date and place of filing of each notice. .05
A copy of the proposed instrument under which the encumbrance to
which the tax lien is to be subordinated will arise, or a
description of the encumbrance, including the amount of the
encumbrance, the nature of the encumbrance (such as mortgage,
assignment, etc.), and the date the transaction is to be
completed. .06
A list of the encumbrances upon the property with respect to which
the certificate is sought showing for each encumbrance-- (1) The name and address of the holder of the encumbrance, (2) A description of the encumbrance, (3) The date of the agreement under which the encumbrance
arose, (4) If recorded, the date and place of recordation, (5) The original principal amount of the encumbrance and the
rate of interest, (6) If known, the principal amount due as of the date of
application (with a separate statement of costs and accrued
interest), and (7) The family relationship, if any, of the applicant to the
holder of any other encumbrance on the property. .07
An estimate by the applicant of the fair market value of the
property with respect to which the certificate is sought. .08
In the case of an application described in section 400.2-1(c)(1)
of the regulations, the amount to be paid to the United States. .09
In the case of an application described in section 400.2-1(c)(2)
of the regulations, a complete statement showing how, in the
opinion of the applicant, the amount realizable by the United
States will ultimately be increased, and how the collection of the
tax liability will be facilitated. .10
Any other information which in the opinion of the applicant might
have a bearing upon the determination to be made. .11
The name and address of the applicant's attorney or
representative, if any. .12
The signature of the applicant. .01
Since the amount to be paid for the issuance of a certificate
under section 400.2-1(c)(1) or (2) of the regulations is a matter
for determination by the district director after consideration of
the facts and law involved, no sum of money or check should be
submitted with an application. .02
In the case of a subordination under section 400.2-1(c)(1) or (2)
of the regulations, the district director will, after approval and
upon receipt of the amount to be paid to the United States, issue
a certificate of subordination. All remittances should be in cash,
or by a certified or cashier's check drawn on any bank or trust
company incorporated under the laws of the United States, or under
the laws of any State or possession of the United States, or by
bank, express, telegraph, or United States postal money order. If
the remittance is not in the form described in the preceding
sentence, the issuance of the certificate of subordination will be
held in abeyance pending clearance of the tendered remittance. In
addition to the information required to be submitted under section
4 of this Revenue Procedure, after submission of the application
the district director may require the applicant to furnish such
additional information as the district director may deem
necessary. ----------
[Footnotes] ---------- 1 Also released as Technical Information Release 961, dated §301.6325-1. Release of lien or discharge of property (a) Release of lien (1) Liability satisfied or unenforceable. --Any
district director may issue a certificate of release of a lien
imposed with respect to any internal revenue tax, whenever he
finds that the entire liability for the tax has been satisfied or
has become unenforceable as a matter of law (and not merely
uncollectible or unenforceable as a matter of fact). Tax
liabilities frequently are unenforceable in fact for the time
being, due to the temporary nonpossession by the taxpayer of
discoverable property or property rights. In all cases the
liability for the payment of the tax continues until satisfaction
of the tax in full or until the expiration of the statutory period
for collection, including such extension of the period for
collection as may be agreed upon in writing by the taxpayer and
the district director. (2) Bond accepted. --The district director may, in his
discretion, issue a certificate of release of any tax lien if he
is furnished and accepts a bond that is conditioned upon the
payment of the amount assessed (together with all interest in
respect thereof), within the time agreed upon in the bond, but not
later than 6 months before the expiration of the statutory period
for collection, including any period for collection agreed upon in
writing by the district director and the taxpayer. For provisions
relating to bonds, see sections 7101 and 7102 and the regulations
thereunder. (b) Discharge of specific property from the lien (1) Property double the amount of the liability (i) The district director may, in his discretion, issue a
certificate of discharge of any part of the property subject to a
lien imposed under chapter 64 of the Code if he determines that
the fair market value of that part of the property remaining
subject to the lien is at least double the sum of the amount of
the unsatisfied liability secured by the lien and of the amount of
all other liens upon the property which have priority over the
lien. In general, fair market value is that amount which one ready
and willing but not compelled to buy would pay to another ready
and willing but not compelled to sell the property. (ii) The following example illustrates a case in which a
certificate of discharge may not be given under this subparagraph: Example.
The Federal tax liability secured by a lien is $1,000. The fair
market value of all property which after the discharge will
continue to be subject to the Federal tax lien is $10,000. There
is a prior mortgage on the property of $5,000, including interest,
and the property is subject to a prior lien of $100 for real
estate taxes. Accordingly, the taxpayer's equity in the property
over and above the amount of the mortgage and real estate taxes is
$4,900, or nearly five times the amount required to pay the
assessed tax on which the Federal tax lien is based. Nevertheless,
a discharge under this subparagraph is not permissible. In the
illustration, the sum of the amount of the Federal tax liability
($1,000) and of the amount of the prior mortgage and the lien for
real estate taxes ($5,000 + $100 = $5,100) is $6,100. Double the
sum is $12,200, but the fair market value of the remaining
property is only $10,000. Hence, a discharge of the property is
not permissible under this subparagraph, since the Code requires
that the fair market value of the remaining property be at least
double the sum of two amounts, one amount being the outstanding
Federal tax liability and the other amount being all prior liens
upon such property. In order that the discharge may be issued, it
would be necessary that the remaining property be worth not less
than $12,200. (2) Part payment; interest of United States valueless (i) Part payment. --The district director may, in his
discretion, issue a certificate of discharge of any part of the
property subject to a lien imposed under chapter 64 of the Code if
there is paid over to him in partial satisfaction of the liability
secured by the lien an amount determined by him to be not less
than the value of the interest of the United States in the
property to be so discharged. In determining the amount to be
paid, the district director will take into consideration all the
facts and circumstances of the case, including the expenses to
which the Government has been put in the matter. In no case shall
the amount to be paid be less than the value of the interest of
the United States in the property with respect to which the
certificate of discharge is to be issued. (ii) Interest of the United States valueless. --The
district director may, in his discretion, issue a certificate of
discharge of any part of the property subject to the lien if he
determines that the interest of the United States in the property
to be so discharged has no value. (iii) Valuation of interest of United States. --For
purposes of this subparagraph, in determining the value of the
interest of the United States in the property, or any part
thereof, with respect to which the certificate of discharge is to
be issued, the district director shall give consideration to the
value of the property and the amount of all liens and encumbrances
thereon having priority over the Federal tax lien. In determining
the value of the property, the district director may, in his
discretion, give consideration to the forced sale value of the
property in appropriate cases. (3) Discharge of property by substitution of proceeds of
sale. --A district director may, in his discretion, issue a
certificate of discharge of any part of the property subject to a
lien imposed under chapter 64 of the Code if such part of the
property is sold and, pursuant to a written agreement with the
district director, the proceeds of the sale are held, as a fund
subject to the liens and claims of the United States, in the same
manner and with the same priority as the lien or claim had with
respect to the discharged property. This subparagraph does not
apply unless the sale divests the taxpayer of all right, title,
and interest in the property sought to be discharged. Any
reasonable and necessary expenses incurred in connection with the
sale of the property and the administration of the sale proceeds
shall be paid by the applicant or from the proceeds of the sale
before satisfaction of any lien or claim of the United States. (4) Application for certificate of discharge. --Any
person desiring a certificate of discharge under this paragraph
shall submit an application in writing to the district director
responsible for collection of the tax. The application shall
contain such information as the district director may require. (c) Estate or gift tax liability fully satisfied or
provided for (1) Certificate of discharge. --If the district
director determines that the tax liability for estate or gift tax
has been fully satisfied, he may issue a certificate of discharge
of any or all property from the lien imposed thereon. If the
district director determines that the tax liability for estate or
gift tax has been adequately provided for, he may issue a
certificate discharging particular items of property from the
lien. If a lien has arisen under section 6324B (relating to
special lien for additional estate tax attributable to farm, etc.,
valuation) and the district director determines that the liability
for additional estate tax has been fully secured in accordance
with §20.6324B-1(c) of this chapter, the district director may
issue a certificate of discharge of the real property from the
section 6324B lien. The issuance of such a certificate is a matter
resting within the discretion of the district director, and a
certificate will be issued only in case there is actual need
therefor. The primary purpose of such discharge is not to evidence
payment or satisfaction of the tax, but to permit the transfer of
property free from the lien in case it is necessary to clear
title. The tax will be considered fully satisfied only when
investigation has been completed and payment of the tax, including
any deficiency determined, has been made. (2) Application for certificate of discharge. --An
application for a certificate of discharge of property from the
lien for estate or gift tax should be filed with the district
director responsible for the collection of the tax. It should be
made in writing under penalties of perjury and should explain the
circumstances that require the discharge, and should fully
describe the particular items for which the discharge is desired.
Where realty is involved each parcel sought to be discharged from
the lien should be described on a separate page and each such
description submitted in duplicate. In the case of an estate tax
lien, the application should show the applicant's relationship to
the estate, such as executor, heir, devisee, legatee, beneficiary,
transferee, or purchaser. If the estate or gift tax return has not
been filed, a statement under penalties of perjury may be required
showing (i) the value of the property to be discharged, (ii) the
basis for such valuation, (iii) in the case of the estate tax, the
approximate value of the gross estate and the approximate value of
the total real property included in the gross estate, (iv) in the
case of the gift tax, the total amount of gifts made during the
calendar year and the prior calendar years subsequent to the
enactment of the Revenue Act of 1932 and the approximate value of
all real estate subject to the gift tax lien, and (v) if the
property is to be sold or otherwise transferred, the name and
address of the purchaser or transferee and the consideration, if
any, paid or to be paid by him. (1) By payment of the amount subordinated. --A
district director may, in his discretion, issue a certificate of
subordination of a lien imposed under chapter 64 of the Code upon
any part of the property subject to the lien if there is paid over
to the district director an amount equal to the amount of the lien
or interest to which the certificate subordinates the lien of the
United States. For this purpose, the tax lien may be subordinated
to another lien or interest on a dollar-for-dollar basis. For
example, if a notice of a Federal tax lien is filed and a
delinquent taxpayer secures a mortgage loan on a part of the
property subject to the tax lien and pays over the proceeds of the
loan to a district director after an application for a certificate
of subordination is approved, the district director will issue a
certificate of subordination. This certificate will have the
effect of subordinating the tax lien to the mortgage. (2) To facilitate tax collection (i) In general. --A district director may, in his
discretion, issue a certificate of subordination of a lien imposed
under chapter 64 of the Code upon any part of the property subject
to the lien if the district director believes that the
subordination of the lien will ultimately result in an increase in
the amount realized by the United States from the property subject
to the lien and will facilitate the ultimate collection of the tax
liability. (ii) Examples. --The provisions of this subparagraph
may be illustrated by the following examples: Example
(1).
A, a farmer, needs money in order to harvest his crop. A Federal
tax lien, notice of which has been filed, is outstanding with
respect to A's property. B, a lending institution, is willing to
make the necessary loan if the loan is secured by a first mortgage
on the farm which is prior to the Federal tax lien. Upon
examination, the district director believes that ultimately the
amount realizable from A's property will be increased and the
collection of the tax liability will be facilitated by the
availability of cash when the crop is harvested and sold. In this
case, the district director may, in his discretion, subordinate
the tax lien on the farm to the mortgage securing the crop
harvesting loan. Example
(2). C
owns a commercial building which is deteriorating and in unsalable
condition. Because of outstanding Federal tax liens, notices of
which have been filed, C is unable to finance the repair and
rehabilitation of the building. D, a contractor, is willing to do
the work if his mechanic's lien on the property is superior to the
Federal tax liens. Upon examination, the district director
believes that ultimately the amount realizable from C's property
will be increased and the collection of the tax liability will be
facilitated by arresting deterioration of the property and
restoring it to salable condition. In this case, the district
director may, in his discretion, subordinate the tax lien on the
building to the mechanic's lien. Example
(3).
E, a manufacturer of electronic equipment, obtains financing from
F, a lending institution, pursuant to a security agreement, with
respect to which a financing statement was duly filed under the
Uniform Commercial Code on Example
(4).
Suit is brought against G by H, who claims ownership of property
the legal title to which is held by G. A Federal tax lien against
G, notice of which has previously been filed, will be enforceable
against the property if G's title is confirmed. Because section
6323(b)(8) is inapplicable, J, an attorney, is unwilling to defend
the case for G unless he is granted a contractual lien on the
property, superior to the Federal tax lien. Upon examination, the
district director believes that the successful defense of the case
by G will increase the amount ultimately realizable from G's
property and will facilitate collection of the tax liability. In
this case, the district director may, in his discretion,
subordinate the tax lien to J's contractual lien on the disputed
property to secure J's reasonable fees and expenses. (3) Subordination of section 6324B lien. --The
district director may issue a certificate of subordination with
respect to a lien imposed by section 6324B if the district
director determines that the interests of the United States will
be adequately secured after such subordination. For example, A,
a qualified heir of qualified real property, needs to borrow money
for farming purposes. If the current fair market value of the real
property is $150,000, the amount of the claim to which the special
lien is to be subordinated is $40,000, the potential liability for
additional tax (as defined in section 2032A(c)) is less than
$55,000, and there are no other facts to indicate that the
interest of the United States will not be adequately secured, the
district director may issue a certificate of subordination. The
result would be the same if the loan were for bona fide purposes
other than farming. (4) Application for certificate of subordination.
--Any person desiring a certificate of subordination under this
paragraph shall submit an application therefor in writing to the
district director responsible for the collection of the tax. The
application shall contain such information as the district
director may require. (e) Nonattachment of lien. --If a district director
determines that, because of confusion of names or otherwise, any
person (other than the person against whom the tax was assessed)
is or may be injured by the appearance that a notice of lien filed
in accordance with §301.6323(f)-1 refers to such person, the
district director may issue a certificate of nonattachment. Such
certificate shall state that the lien, notice of which has been
filed, does not attach to the property of such person. Any person
desiring a certificate of nonattachment under this paragraph shall
submit an application therefor in writing to the district director
responsible for the collection of the tax. The application shall c
ontain such information as the district director may require. (f) Effect of certificate (1) Conclusiveness. --Except as provided in
subparagraphs (2) and (3) of this paragraph, if a certificate is
issued under section 6325 by a district director and the
certificate is filed in the same office as the notice of lien to
which it relates (if the notice of lien has been filed), the
certificate shall have the following effect -- (i) In the case of a certificate of release issued under
paragraph (a) of this section, the certificate shall be conclusive
that the tax lien referred to in the certificate is extinguished; (ii) In the case of a certificate of discharge issued under
paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, the certificate shall be
conclusive that the property covered by the certificate is
discharged from the tax lien; (iii) In the case of a certificate of subordination issued
under paragraph (d) of this section, the certificate shall be
conclusive that the lien or interest to which the Federal tax lien
is subordinated is superior to the tax lien; and (iv) In the case of a certificate of nonattachment issued
under paragraph (e), the certificate shall be conclusive that the
lien of the United States does not attach to the property of the
person referred to in the certificate. (2) Revocation of certificate of release or nonattachment (i) In general. --If a district director determines
that either -- (a) A certificate of release or a certificate of nonattachment
of the general tax lien imposed by section 6321 was issued
erroneously or improvidently, or (b) A certificate of release of such lien was issued in
connection with a compromise agreement under section 7122 which
has been breached, |