Blake M. Adams v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
Submitted September 5, 2024 Decided December 6, 2024
No. 23-1063
B LAKE M. ADAMS ,
APPELLANT
v.
C OMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL R EVENUE,
APPELLEE
On Appeal from the United States Tax Court
Blake M. Adams, pro se, was on the briefs for appellant.
Michael J. Haungs, Supervisory Attorney, U.S.
Department of Justice, and Andrew W. Amend, Attorney, were
on the brief for appellee. Kathleen E. Lyon, Attorney, entered
an appearance.
Before: P ILLARD and GARCIA, Circuit Judges, and
R OGERS , Senior Circuit Judge.
Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge P ILLARD.

-- 1 of 12 --

2
P ILLARD, Circuit Judge: Section 7345 of the Internal
Revenue Code requires the Secretary of the Treasury to notify
the Secretary of State if an individual has an IRS-certified
seriously delinquent tax debt. The State Department may then
deny, revoke, or limit that individual’s passport. Anyone
whose tax debt has been certified as seriously delinquent has a
right to challenge the certification in court. 26 U.S.C.
§ 7345(e).
Blake Adams filed no federal income tax return for tax
years 2007 or 2009-2015. The Internal Revenue Service
calculated that he owed more than $1.2 million in back taxes,
interest, and penalties for those years. Because of the
magnitude of Adams’s unpaid and unchallenged tax debt,
which the IRS was in the process of collecting, the agency
certified his seriously delinquent tax debt to the State
Department. After receiving notice that the certification was
made and transmitted to the State Department, Adams sued the
IRS in Tax Court under section 7345. He claimed that the IRS
made procedural errors in assessing his underlying tax debt that
rendered the certification erroneous. The Tax Court rejected
that argument, explaining that Adams had forfeited the
opportunities that the Tax Code affords to contest his
underlying tax liability. Because the Tax Court correctly
concluded that Adams’s section 7345 challenge is foreclosed,
we affirm.
BACKGROUND
A.
Once the IRS determines that a taxpayer has a tax
deficiency, before it assesses the deficiency it is required to
mail a notice of deficiency by certified or registered mail and
wait until the individual’s time to request a redetermination of
the deficiency in Tax Court has lapsed. 26 U.S.C. §§ 6212(a),

-- 2 of 12 --

3
6213(a). A taxpayer within the United States has 90 days to
file a Tax Court petition seeking redetermination of the
deficiency. See id. § 6213(a). After the IRS assesses the tax,
it is again required to send the taxpayer notice by mail. Id.
§ 6303(a).
If the taxpayer has not contested the deficiency, the IRS
moves on to the collection phase by sending him a notice of
federal tax lien and informing him of his right to a collection
due process hearing. See id. §§ 6320(a), 6321. In a collection
due process hearing, the individual can “raise . . . challenges to
the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability for any
tax period if [he] did not receive any statutory notice of
deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise have an
opportunity to dispute such tax liability.” See id. § 6320(c)
(incorporating id. § 6330(c)(2)(B)). More broadly, a taxpayer
may raise “any relevant issue relating to the unpaid tax or the
proposed levy,” including “challenges to the appropriateness of
collection actions.” See id. § 6320(c) (incorporating id.
§ 6330(c)(2)(A)(ii)).
Congress enacted section 7345 in 2015 as a mechanism to
offset spending under the Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act by adding incentives for
individuals with large, delinquent tax debts to pay them without
further delay. See generally H.R. Rep. No. 114-357, at 530-32
(2015) (Conf. Rep.) (identifying offsets). Section 7345 defines
a seriously delinquent tax debt as an “unpaid, legally
enforceable Federal tax liability of an individual” that meets
three requirements. 26 U.S.C. § 7345(b)(1). The first
requirement is that the tax debt was “assessed.” Id.
§ 7345(b)(1)(A). Second, the debt must be greater than
$50,000—a threshold periodically adjusted for inflation. Id.
§§ 7345(b)(1)(B), 7345(f). And, third, the IRS must have
either (i) filed a notice of lien pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6323 and

-- 3 of 12 --

4
waited for the individual’s administrative rights under 26
U.S.C. § 6320 to be exhausted or lapse or (ii) made a levy on
the individual’s income or other property under 26 U.S.C.
§ 6331. Id. § 7345(b)(1)(C). (Liens and levies are part of the
IRS’ collection authority: A federal tax lien is the
government’s legal claim against an individual’s property
when they fail to pay a tax debt. See id. § 6321. A levy is the
seizure of the individual’s property to satisfy a tax debt. See
id. § 6331(b)).
The statute recognizes two circumstances under which,
even if the three criteria are met, a tax debt is not seriously
delinquent: where the debt is being paid in a timely manner
under an agreement with the IRS, or where collection of the
debt is suspended because the individual has requested a
collection due process hearing or is pursuing relief from joint
liability. Id. § 7345(b)(2). The IRS Commissioner must notify
the Secretary of the Treasury, who must in turn notify the
Secretary of State, if the certification is erroneous; the debtor
fully satisfies the tax debt; the debtor agrees to an installment
agreement or offer-in-compromise; or the debtor qualifies for
innocent spouse relief. Id. § 7345(c) (Reversal of
Certification).
Once the IRS determines that an individual has a seriously
delinquent tax debt, it notifies the Treasury Secretary, who
“shall” in turn transmit the certification to the Secretary of State
“for action with respect to denial, revocation, or limitation” of
the individual’s passport. Id. § 7345(a). That person may bring
a civil action in district court or in Tax Court to challenge the
seriously delinquent tax debt certification as erroneous or on
the ground that the IRS Commissioner failed to reverse the
certification when required. Id. § 7345(e)(1). If the court rules
in the tax debtor’s favor, it “may order the Secretary [of the

-- 4 of 12 --

5
Treasury] to notify the Secretary of State that such certification
was erroneous.” Id. § 7345(e)(2).
B.
As noted above, Blake Adams failed to file federal income
tax returns for 2007 and 2009-2015. Adams asserts that the
IRS never mailed him deficiency notices for the relevant years.
But Adams did not file the requisite petition in Tax Court
within the allotted 90-day period to challenge the deficiencies,
so the IRS proceeded to assess them. Adams claims that he
never received notice of those assessments either.
The IRS then sought to collect. For tax years 2007 and
2009-2011, the IRS in August 2015 filed notices of lien and
notified Adams of his right to a collection due process hearing.
A year later, in August 2016, the IRS filed notices of lien and
notified Adams of his collection due process rights for tax years
2012 and 2013. For the 2014 tax year, the IRS filed the notice
of lien and notified Adams of his collection due process rights
in August 2019, and for the 2015 tax year it did so in December
2019. Adams acknowledges that, after receiving those notices,
he did not request any collection due process hearing. See
Adams Br. 4.
The IRS also issued notices of intent to levy against
Adams. For tax years 2007 and 2009-2011, it issued a notice
of intent to levy in March 2016. For tax years 2012-2014, it
did so in August 2019. For the 2015 tax year, it did so in
December 2019. It is uncontested that those notices also
informed Adams about his right to a collection due process
hearing. He never requested one. The IRS proceeded to issue
those levies between 2017 and 2020, recovering approximately
$26,700. That left Adams with more than $1.1 million in
outstanding liabilities.

-- 5 of 12 --

6
On March 16, 2020, the IRS certified the seriously
delinquent tax debt to the State Department. The record
reflects that the IRS had previously certified that Adams owed
a seriously delinquent tax debt for the 2007 and 2009-2013 tax
years on July 30, 2018. See Tax Court Record 50, 53, 56, 59,
62, 65. It issued another certification covering the 2007 and
2009-2014 tax years on November 18, 2019. See Tax Court
Record 50, 53, 56, 59, 62, 65, 68. Adams never challenged the
two earlier certifications.
On December 3, 2020, Adams filed a petition in Tax Court
challenging the 2020 certification of seriously delinquent tax
debt under section 7345. Adams rested his petition on five
grounds. He argued that: (1) the IRS never sent him “any
documents by 1st class or certified mail explaining what these
taxes are based on”; (2) the IRS never sent him “any letter,
giving [him] due process & opportunity to challenge the tax for
years ‘07, ‘09-‘15”; (3) the $1.2 million figure he owes to the
IRS is “completely baseless, arbitrary, [and] lacking any
foundation of fact”; (4) the IRS “did not perform all the legally
required procedures necessary to assess the tax which IRS
claims [he] owes;” and (5) the certification was an
“unconstitutional taking away” of his right to travel. Tax Court
Pet. 1 (J.A. 5) (formatting altered).
The Tax Court granted summary judgment in the
government’s favor. Adams v. Comm’r, 160 T.C. 1, 18 (2023).
To the extent that Adams was asserting that the IRS’
calculation of his tax debt was incorrect, the court held that it
lacked jurisdiction to review the tax liabilities underlying the
certification. Id. at 10-13. The Tax Court concluded that, even
if the IRS had failed to mail the required notices during its
collection actions, the certification was not “erroneous” under
section 7345. Id. at 13-15. The Tax Court held that it lacked
jurisdiction to review the Secretary of State’s discretionary

-- 6 of 12 --

7
determination, on receipt of a seriously delinquent tax debt
certification, to revoke, deny, or limit the taxpayer’s passport.
Id. at 16. The Tax Court concluded that it did not have
jurisdiction to review Adams’s constitutional right-to-travel
claim. Id. at 17-18. Adams timely appealed.
The Tax Court initially transmitted the notice of appeal to
the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The Tax Court
later transmitted an amended notice to this court, which
ultimately docketed the case. In short order, Adams moved to
transfer venue to the Eleventh Circuit. We deferred decision
on that motion to consider it with the merits of Adams’s
petition. We review the Tax Court’s legal rulings de novo.
Byers v. Comm’r, 740 F.3d 668, 674-75 (D.C. Cir. 2014).
Because Adams does not raise the constitutional claim on
appeal, we do not consider it.
DISCUSSION
This court is the correct venue for Adams’s section 7345
challenge. Adams’s arguments fail on the merits: The Tax
Court correctly held that every element of section 7345(b)(1),
defining seriously delinquent tax debt, was satisfied. Adams’s
belated effort to use a section 7345 passport action to challenge
his underlying tax liability is foreclosed because Adams
forewent opportunities to timely challenge that liability in
collection due process hearings.
A.
Before proceeding to the merits, we conclude that venue is
proper here and not, as Adams contends, in the Eleventh
Circuit. The D.C. Circuit is the default venue for appeals of
Tax Court decisions. See 26 U.S.C. § 7482(b)(1); Byers, 740
F.3d at 672. Section 7482 lists seven circumstances in which
venue may lie elsewhere, 26 U.S.C. §§ 7482(b)(1)(A)-(G), but

-- 7 of 12 --

8
review of a Tax Court decision on a challenge to certification
of a seriously delinquent tax debt is not one of them, see id.
Adams, a Florida resident, argues that venue lies in the
Eleventh Circuit because appeals of cases in which an
individual is “seeking redetermination of tax liability” are
reviewable in the circuit where the individual lives. See id.
§ 7482(b)(1)(A). But Adams’s reliance on that provision is
misplaced. Adams petitioned the Tax Court for recission of the
seriously delinquent tax debt certification. The only relief
available if such a petition succeeds is an order holding that the
certification is erroneous, pursuant to which the Secretary of
the Treasury would have to inform the Secretary of State of the
error. Although Adams’s petition asserts that his underlying
tax liability was imposed in error, he did not petition for
“redetermination” of tax liability nor, in this posture, could he.
We cannot construe his petition as “seeking” legal relief that is
unavailable in this action. That means section 7482(b)(1)(A),
providing for venue of a redetermination appeal where the
taxpayer lives, is inapplicable here.
Adams’s motion to transfer venue is therefore denied.
B.
Adams’s merits arguments are also unsuccessful. The text
of section 7345, read in context with other provisions of the
Internal Revenue Code, resolves this appeal. The seriously
delinquent tax debt certification was correct.
Section 7345(e) provides for injunctive relief from an
erroneous seriously delinquent tax debt certification or one that
the IRS should have but failed to reverse. See 26 U.S.C.
§ 7345(e)(1). Adams’s only argument for relief is that the
certification itself is erroneous; he does not contend that any of
the other grounds for reversal apply. See id. § 7345(c). Section

-- 8 of 12 --

9
7345 does not further define when a certification may be
“found to be erroneous,” but is most naturally read to apply
when any of the elements defining “seriously delinquent tax
debt” is not satisfied or when one of the two statutory
exceptions set out in section 7345(b)(2) applies.
Here, the Tax Court determined that each of the
definitional elements of a seriously delinquent tax debt was
satisfied. Adams’s tax liability “has been assessed” in an
amount “greater than” the adjusted minimum threshold amount
of $53,000, and a “notice of lien has been filed,” as to which
Adams’s “administrative rights under section 6320” have
lapsed. Adams, 160 T.C. at 4, 8. Adams has not claimed that
either of the statutory exceptions applies—i.e., he does not
assert that he is paying his tax debt under an agreement with
the IRS, or that collection was suspended pending a collection
due process hearing or a petition for relief from joint liability.
Adams’s primary contention on appeal is that section
7345(b)(1)(A) requires not just that the IRS have “assessed”
the tax, but that it did so “properly.” Adams Mot. Summ. J. 5
(J.A. 15). Specifically, Adams contends that the IRS failed to
serve him notice of each deficiency and assessment in the
statutorily prescribed manner. In his view, that means the
assessments were illegal and so cannot support the certification
of a seriously delinquent tax debt.
The Internal Revenue Code forecloses this argument.
Under the Code, assessment means “recording the liability of
the taxpayer in the office of the Secretary [of the Treasury] in
accordance with rules or regulations prescribed by the
Secretary.” 26 U.S.C. § 6203. As the Supreme Court has
explained, “the assessment is the official recording of liability
that triggers levy and collection efforts.” Hibbs v. Winn, 542
U.S. 88, 101 (2004). The assessment itself is “essentially a

-- 9 of 12 --

10
bookkeeping notation.” Id. at 100 (quoting Laing v. United
States, 423 U.S. 161, 170 n.13 (1976) (internal quotations
omitted)). As the Tax Court noted, there is no dispute that the
IRS recorded the liabilities at issue here. Adams, 160 T.C. at
13.
To be sure, the Code also provides that “no assessment of
a deficiency . . . shall be made, begun, or prosecuted” until the
IRS has mailed the taxpayer a notice of deficiency and the 90-
day period to file a Tax Court petition for redetermination of
the deficiency has run. See 26 U.S.C. § 6213(a). And “it is the
assessment, and only the assessment, that sets in motion the
collection powers of the IRS, powers that include the seizure
of assets, the freezing of bank accounts and the creation of
liens, all without judicial process.” Farhy v. Comm’r, 100
F.4th 223, 226 (D.C. Cir. 2024) (quoting Phila. & Reading
Corp. v. United States, 944 F.2d 1063, 1064 n.1 (3d Cir. 1991)
(formatting altered)).
But Adams did not timely use the opportunities the Tax
Code made available to him to challenge any lack of notice of
deficiencies. A tax debt is “seriously delinquent” only once the
IRS has also filed a notice of lien and “the administrative rights
under section 6320 with respect to such filing have been
exhausted or have lapsed” or “a levy is made pursuant to
section 6331.” 26 U.S.C. § 7345(b)(1)(C). Section 6331
requires that the IRS give an individual written notice at least
30 days before any levy and include language notifying the
taxpayer of “the administrative appeals available to the
taxpayer with respect to such levy and sale and the procedures
relating to such appeals.” Id. §§ 6331(d)(2), (d)(4). Adams
acknowledges that he received notice of the filing of tax liens
for the years in question. The record shows that he also
received notices of intent to levy for those years. The notices
of lien and intent to levy informed Adams of his right to

-- 10 of 12 --

11
collection due process hearings at which he could have
objected to the missing deficiency and assessment notices and
contested his underlying tax liabilities. He forfeited those
opportunities.
In his briefs on appeal, Adams seeks additional footing for
his claim: He argues for the first time that, because the IRS
cannot enforce a procedurally defective assessment, the
assessments fall short of section 7345(b)(1)’s requirement that
a “seriously delinquent tax debt” be “legally enforceable.”
Adams Br. 10; Reply Br. 3. Because Adams did not make that
argument in the Tax Court, which accordingly did not address
the meaning of “legally enforceable” in this context, we do not
address it here.
We hold that, because each of the definitional elements set
forth in section 7345(b)(1) was satisfied, the certification of
Adams’s seriously delinquent tax debt was not “erroneous”
within the meaning of section 7345(c).
To recap, the Treasury Secretary may only transmit a
delinquency certification to the State Department after an
individual has had the opportunity to exercise administrative
rights to challenge an IRS lien or levy. It is uncontested that
the IRS served Adams with notice of its collection actions and
his administrative rights over multiple years. Adams took no
action to timely contest the tax liens or underlying deficiency
determinations. Only much later, after his passport was in
jeopardy, did he attempt to dispute the IRS collection and
enforcement actions. Section 7345 plainly forecloses such an
eleventh-hour collateral attack on a person’s underlying tax
liabilities.

-- 11 of 12 --

12
For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the
Tax Court.
So ordered.

-- 12 of 12 --