19 C.F.R. § 171.32
Acceptance of offers in compromise
An offer in compromise will be considered accepted only when the offeror is so notified in writing. As a condition to accepting an offer in compromise, the offeror may be required to enter into any collateral agreement or to post any security which is deemed necessary for the protection of the interest of the United States.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1985–1993 · leading case: Trayco, Inc. v. The United States, 994 F.2d 832 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Trayco, Inc. v. The United States, 994 F.2d 832 (Fed. Cir. 1993). “Although the government concedes that the regulations are silent on this issue, it asserts that preclusion of judicial review where an importer elects to pursue administrative remedies is implicit in 19 C.F.R. § 171.32 . The government argues that Customs’ long-standing and…”
United States v. Modes, Inc., 723 F. Supp. 811 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989). “Defendants argue that “[ajccording to the administrative regulations, Modes is entitled to have the Department of Treasury consider its supplemental petition ( 19 C.F.R. § 171.32 ) and is entitled to an oral hearing ( 19 C.”
United States v. Dantzler Lumber & Exp. Co., 810 F. Supp. 1277 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1992). “A regulation governing mitigation, 19 C.F.R. § 171.32 , has provided that a decision to mitigate a penalty or to remit a forfeiture upon condition that a stated amount is paid shall be effective for not more than 60 days from the date of notice to the petitioner of such…”
United States v. Tabor, 608 F. Supp. 658 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1985). “Plaintiff cites as the relevant “law” 19 C.F.R. § 171.32 , which provides inter alia for payment of mitigated penalties within a specified period.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.