Opinion ID: 253432
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Alleged Voluntary Tax-Payment.

Text: 12 The threshold question in such a common-law action is whether the original payment was voluntarily made. It is a general rule that anyone who freely, willingly, and knowingly (i.e., voluntarily) gives something to another loses all title to it. It is well settled in the District of Columbia that a tax payment voluntarily made cannot be recovered. 9 However there has been considerable dispute as to when a payment is 'involuntary'. 13 Not every payment of money 'under protest' is an involuntary payment which will support a suit for recovery of the amount paid. 10 Nor does the mere presence of a law providing for summary distraint of property belonging to tax delinquents convert every tax payment into an 'involuntary' one. And clearly the fact that interest will or may accrue, or even has accrued, does not constitute legal duress. 11 However, when we were confronted in an earlier case 12 with a combination of these several factors, we found the payment 'involuntary'. In that case certain trust companies, faced with the prospect of monthly tax penalties, adverse publicity as tax delinquents, and summary distraint of their properties, paid, under protest, the gross earnings tax assessed by the District of Columbia. We held that the payments were involuntary and supported a common-law action for recovery. In the instant case we are concerned with a tax payment, made at a time when some interest had already accrued, by a taxpayer who testified that at the time he paid the tax he knew that non-payment would bring tax penalties and that his bank account could be attached, his property taken, and a criminal action begun against him. We think a payment under these circumstances was manifestly involuntary. We so hold. 14