Danshera Cords (Capital) has published Administrative Law and Judicial Review of Tax Collection Decisions, 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 429 (2008).  Here is the Conclusion:

A consistent approach to judicial review of tax collection decisions will benefit taxpayers and tax collection and administration. Moreover, following the relatively clear direction of Congress to review tax collection decisions for abuse of discretion will reduce the workload relating to tax collection cases. Using the rule of record review, it would be unnecessary to conduct time and resource intensive de novo trials and increase the incentive for taxpayers to present all relevant issues at the hearing. The Tax Court will be able to more efficiently handle the other cases on its docket that require de novo review. All taxpayers should receive a quicker adjudication, reducing the total amount of interest and penalties that will ultimately be due on unpaid liabilities.

To achieve these benefits, the Tax Court must reconsider its approach to the review of judicial appeals of CDP determinations. The Tax Court should realize that not only does the law require that it limit its review in CDP appeals to the record created by the Service, unless the underlying liability is at issue, but also that it is prudent, efficient, and beneficial to tax administration that it do so. The Tax Court should consider the arguments raised by Tax Court Judges Halpern and Holmes in support of the application of administrative law. It should also give close attention to the Eighth Circuit’s decision in Robinette.

However, given the Tax Court’s long-standing reluctance to apply the APA and administrative law, the Tax Court may be hesitant to significantly change its approach to the review of IRS collection decisions. Rather, it may be necessary for additional cases to be brought to the circuit courts of appeals, requiring the Tax Court to apply the rules of administrative law in cases arising in each circuit. Alternatively, Congress could direct the Tax Court regarding the appropriate approach. Both of these alternatives require external intervention, which could be avoided if the Tax Court heeds the wisdom of the Eighth Circuit’s Robinette decision. Reconsideration by the Tax Court would be more expeditious. Nonetheless, it is essential to proper operation of the tax collection system that changes occur with respect to judicial review of tax collection decisions. Voluntary change by the courts is preferable, but unless that happens, legislative direction is needed. That almost ten years after the enactment of RRA 1998 the judges of the Tax Court are still debating whether de novo fact-finding or traditional abuse of discretion review is appropriate suggests that there is still a ways to go in settling the debate, and legislative intervention may be unavoidable.