Source: http://federaltaxprocedure.blogspot.com/2013/01/is-timely-mailing-timely-filing-statute.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 11:02:57+00:00

Document:
2. Common Law Mailbox Rules.
The rule is well settled that if a letter properly directed is proved to have been either put into the post office or delivered to the postman, it is presumed, from the known course of business in the post office department, that it reached its destination at the regular time, and was received by the person to whom it was addressed.
This rule may apply in tax cases, although the decisions are varied as to how and if it applies (i.e. some courts think § 7502 pre-empts the field).
Let’s first illustrate the differences between the common law rule and § 7502 by some examples in two scenarios involving only slight variations in the fact pattern. In both cases, the IRS denies having received the return or claim for refund.
Example 1: The taxpayer allegedly mailed the return or claim for refund with postage paid (but not in the guaranteed formats of § 7502) on the last day in which the return or claim for refund could have been filed, let’s say April 15 of year 02. If the IRS had received it at all, it would have been after the due date of April 15 of year 02. The common law mailbox rule supply timeliness. This, of course, is the phenomenon for which § 7502 was enacted to take the vagaries out of times for delivery and provide a certain method to make timely mailing a timely filing.
Example 2: The taxpayer allegedly mailed the return or claim for refund in the same manner, except the taxpayer allegedly mailed it on February 1 of year 02. The due date is April 15 of year 02, so the mailing should easily be delivered to the IRS within the normal time and, if it had been so delivered, § 7502 would have no operation (remember that § 7502 only applied to documents delivered to the IRS after the due date). Even if § 7502 might arguably pre-empt the field in the Example 1 situation, one court has suggested that it cannot in this Example 2 and the mailbox rule can apply.
Courts which permit some continued application for the mailbox rule in either type of case where the IRS has no record of receipt usually will want more evidence than the taxpayer’s own self-serving testimony.
Consider another example to illustrate the limitations of the mailbox rule. Assume that the U.S. Postal Service has a two day delivery from the taxpayer’s home town where she deposits the return in the mail and the IRS Service Center to which the return is addressed. If the taxpayer, an individual, deposits a Year 1 return in the mail on April 15 of Year 2, the original due date, § 7502 treats the return as timely filed on April 15 of Year 2, but the common-law mailbox rule would treat the return as filed on April 17, the date the IRS is deemed under that rule to have received it. Consider a similar example, with the taxpayer having timely filed his return by mail on April 15 of Year 2 and then mails the IRS a claim for refund on April 15 of Year 5. Under § 7502, the claim for refund will be timely filed but under the common-law mailbox rule it would not because the IRS would not be deemed to have received it until April 17 of Year 5.
Finally, there is a development that may moot the possible application of the mailbox rule. The IRS has issued a proposed regulation that, if valid, would pre-empt the application of the mailbox rule and make registered or certified mail the exclusive way to be certain that the timely-mailing, timely-filing rule applies. It remains to be seen whether the proposed regulation will be promulgated or, if promulgated, would be valid.
b. The Prison Mailbox Rule.
The “prison mailbox” rule is a special variant of the mailbox rule that may apply in some cases to persons who are incarcerated in the United States. A prisoner rarely has unfettered access to a mailbox and, hence, the rule developed that delivery to prison officials will be treated as a mailing so as to invoke the mailbox rule. A taxpayer seeking to rely on this rule (even it ever was or still is viable) bears the burden of proving timely delivery for filing.

References: § 7502
 § 7502
 § 7502
 § 7502
 § 7502
 § 7502
 § 7502
 § 7502
 § 7502