You received a final notice of intent to levy

What the Letter means

Letter 1058 comes from Field Collection, usually an assigned revenue officer; Letter LT11 comes from the Automated Collection System. Both are Final Notices of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing under IRC §6331(d) and §6330(a). A levy takes property to pay tax, while a lien is the government's legal claim against property.

The usual earlier sequence is CP14, CP501, CP503 and CP504, but the actual notices in your case must be checked. Once the 30-day period expires, the IRS may have authority under IRC §6331(a) to levy wages, bank or investment accounts, real property and receivables. A levy is not automatic on day 31.

Section 3401 of the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, created the hearing framework. IRC §6320 governs lien hearings and IRC §6330 governs levy hearings. Collection Due Process (CDP) is the formal Appeals hearing for reviewing the proposed collection and eligible alternatives.

Filing Form 12153 on time

Under IRC §7502 (timely mailing treated as timely filing) and IRM 5.1.9, the request generally must be postmarked by the deadline, not received by the IRS by then. Keep proof of mailing, such as certified mail with return receipt. Under IRC §7503, if the 30th day is a weekend or legal holiday, the deadline generally moves to the next business day.

A timely hearing request generally pauses levy for the periods covered under IRC §6330(e)(1), while the hearing and any court review are pending. IRC §6330(f) provides exceptions for jeopardy, state income tax refund, disqualified employment tax and federal contractor levies. The IRS may still file a lien or offset refunds; a hearing request is not a promise of release of a levy already served.

What Appeals reviews

IRC §6330(c)(1) requires an impartial Appeals officer with no prior involvement to verify the legal and procedural requirements. The Settlement Officer, the Appeals employee handling the case, considers the issues raised and balances collection against unnecessary intrusion. The IRS decides whether the proposed alternative is acceptable.

• An installment agreement under IRC §6159 means monthly payments; the existing streamlined example is a balance under $50,000.
• An offer in compromise under IRC §7122 asks the IRS to accept less than the full balance, using Form 656 and Form 433-A(OIC) for an ability-to-pay offer.
• Currently not collectible status means the IRS finds no present ability to pay after allowable living expenses; Form 433-A documents the finances.
• Innocent spouse relief under IRC §6015 may address responsibility for a spouse's tax.
• Hardship release under IRC §6343(a)(1)(D) addresses an individual levy that prevents payment of reasonable basic living expenses.

Giamelli v. Commissioner, 129 T.C. 107 (2007), requires issues to be raised before the Settlement Officer rather than first on Tax Court review. Form 2848 authorizes IRS representation, and Form 9465 is an installment agreement request.

When you can dispute the tax itself

IRC §6330(c)(2)(B) limits challenges to the tax amount when there was a prior opportunity to dispute it. Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176 (2000), and Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 611 (2000), focus on whether that opportunity existed, not whether you used it.

Receiving a Notice of Deficiency and letting its 90-day petition window expire generally prevents reopening the assessment at this hearing. The hearing may still address collection alternatives. Substitute for Return assessments or math-error notices without a Notice of Deficiency require review of whether any other prior opportunity existed.

Bell v. Commissioner, 126 T.C. 356 (2006), addresses a prior hearing as an earlier opportunity. Barnhill v. Commissioner, 155 T.C. 1 (2020), analyzes §6330(c)(2)(B) without deference to the IRS.

After the determination

IRC §6330(d)(1) generally gives 30 days from the Notice of Determination to petition the United States Tax Court. Boechler, P.C. v. Commissioner, 596 U.S. 199 (2022), holds that this deadline is not jurisdictional and may allow equitable tolling in rare cases. Do not rely on an extension without case-specific legal advice.

Commissioner v. Zuch, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), addresses dismissal as moot when the IRS no longer pursues the levy, such as after offsets pay the balance. The court reviews an eligible tax-liability dispute anew, called de novo review, and collection-alternative decisions for abuse of discretion. Tax Court–admitted counsel handles court representation; our IRS administrative representation does not imply admission to that court.

If the 30-day deadline has passed

An Equivalent Hearing is the later Appeals review available under Treas. Reg. §301.6330-1(i)(2), generally within one year. Form 12153 is still used. It does not carry the same automatic levy pause or Tax Court review of the collection determination.

Appeals can consider collection alternatives, but the IRS may continue collection while the request is pending. A separate request for a hold, Form 911 assistance from the Taxpayer Advocate Service, or a direct release request under IRC §6343 may be appropriate. None guarantees that collection will pause.

• The collection statute expiration date, the IRS collection deadline, continues running rather than being suspended under IRC §6330(e)(1).
• Appeals consideration of collection alternatives remains available.
• Separate, narrow judicial-review routes under IRC §6015 and §6404 may still apply.

Credit bureaus stopped reporting tax liens in 2018, but a Notice of Federal Tax Lien remains a public record. Letter 3172 explains separate lien-hearing rights under IRC §6320. Filing Form 12153 does not itself trigger that lien filing.

Sources and IRS Forms

Ebot Mbi, CPA, EA · Texas CPA #127163 · IRS Enrolled Agent, federally authorized by the U.S. Department of the Treasury under Circular 230. The office is at 4425 W Airport Fwy, Ste 595, Irving, TX 75062.

Fees and engagement

The scope and fee are confirmed in writing before IRS contact.

Notice Review

$97

Case Analysis

Case Analysis: $497

Resolution work

Fixed by work type and amount owed

Representation (Form 2848)

$1,000

Case Analysis is $497 regardless of balance owed, tax years, complexity or urgency. The $97 Notice Review is credited toward the $497 Case Analysis. Phase 2 work is priced in the published ranges on our IRS fee page, or quoted in writing after the Case Analysis. Fixed fees, confirmed in writing before work begins. Not a guarantee of any IRS outcome. We never charge a percentage of tax saved.

The engagement letter is the controlling document; no specific outcome or timeline is guaranteed. Outcomes depend on individual facts, current IRS procedures and applicable law. Texas CPAs are bound by the rules of the Texas State Board of Public Accountancy.

Common questions