Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-1472_6j37.pdf
Page Number: 5

2 

BOECHLER v. COMMISSIONER 

Opinion of the Court 

I 

Boechler is a law firm in Fargo, North Dakota.  In 2015, 
the IRS notified Boechler of a discrepancy in its tax filings.  
When Boechler did not respond, the agency assessed an “in-
tentional disregard” penalty and notified Boechler of its in-
tent to levy—in other words, to seize and sell—Boechler’s 
property to satisfy the penalty.  See 26 U. S. C. §§6330(a), 
6721(a)(2), (e)(2)(A).  That got Boechler’s attention, and in 
an effort to prevent the levy, it requested a hearing before 
the agency’s Independent Office of Appeals.  §6330(b).  This 
proceeding—known  as  a  collection  due  process  hearing—
generally  provides  taxpayers  with  administrative  review 
before  the  IRS  takes  their  property.    §6330(a)(1).  At  its 
hearing, Boechler challenged the penalty, arguing both that
there was no discrepancy in its tax filings and that the pen-
alty was excessive.

The  Independent  Office  of  Appeals  sustained  the  pro-
posed levy.  Under §6330(d)(1), Boechler had 30 days to pe-
tition  the  Tax  Court  to  review  this  collection  due  process 
determination.  But Boechler dropped the ball and filed its 
petition a day late.  The Tax Court dismissed the petition 
for  lack  of  jurisdiction  and  the  Eighth  Circuit  affirmed, 
agreeing  that  §6330(d)(1)’s  30-day  filing  deadline  is  juris-
dictional and thus cannot be equitably tolled.  967 F. 3d 760 
(2020).  We granted certiorari.  594 U. S. ___ (2021). 

II 
A 
Jurisdictional requirements mark the bounds of a “court’s
adjudicatory authority.”  Kontrick  v. Ryan, 540 U. S. 443, 
455 (2004).  Yet not all procedural requirements fit that bill. 
Many simply instruct “parties [to] take certain procedural
steps  at  certain  specified  times”  without  conditioning  a 
court’s authority to hear the case on compliance with those 
steps.  Henderson  v.  Shinseki,  562  U. S.  428,  435  (2011).
These nonjurisdictional rules “promote the orderly progress