Legal Document

516 U.S. 235116 S.Ct. 647133 L.Ed.2d 611 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner,v.Robert F. LUNDY. No. 94-1785. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Nov. 6, 1995. Decided Jan. 17, 1996. Syllabus * Respondent Lundy and his wife withheld from their 1987 wages substantially more in federal income taxes than they actually owed for that year, but did not file tax return when it was due, nor a or claim refund overpaid succeeding 21/2 years. On September 26, 1990, Commissioner Internal Revenue mailed notice deficiency 1987. Some three months later, Lundys filed joint return, which claimed taxes, timely petition Tax seeking redetermination refund. The held where, as here, taxpayer has by time is mailed, two years after date on are paid, 2-year "look-back" period applies under 26 U.S.C. § 6512(b)(3)(B), court lacks jurisdiction to award Fourth Circuit reversed, finding applicable look-back these circumstances had Held: paid prior deficiency, if, yet return. In circumstances, 6512(b)(3)(B) Pp. 650-657. (a) Section forbids unless first determines were "within [look-back] would be section 6511(b)(2) . if mailing [for refund] been filed." 6511(b)(2)(A) turn instructs apply 3-year filed, required 6511(a), 3 filed," while 6511(b)(2)(B) specifies within period. properly applied Lundy's case because, 1990 (the mailed), and, consequently, described 6511(a). wages, so deemed due (April 15, 1988), mailed. therefore outside period, 650-653. (b) suggests alternative interpretations neither persuasive. adopts Circuit's view, determined reference refund, argues he entitled because late-filed contained filing itself. This interpretation contrary requirements statute leads result Congress could have intended, some subjects filer shorter limitations delinquent filer. second argument, "claim" contemplated can only such uniform section, similarly language statute. 653-656. (c) bound 6512(b)(3)(B)'s written, even persuaded policy-based arguments applying free rewrite simply its effects might susceptible improvement. 656-657. 45 F.3d 856 (C.A. 4 1995), reversed. O'CONNOR, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, GINSBURG, BREYER, JJ., joined. STEVENS, dissenting opinion. THOMAS, opinion, Kent L. Jones, petitioner. Glenn P. Schwartz, Chicago, IL, respondent. Justice O'CONNOR Court. 1 this case, we consider obtaining decide whether when, We hold set forth applies, 2 During 1987, respondent Robert $10,131 wages. amount $6,594 half informing him $7,672 additional interest liable substantial penalties negligent underpayment see §§ 6651(a)(1) 6653(1). Service (IRS) December 22, 1990. indicated $3,537 amount. Two days couple's taxes. an answer generally denying allegations petition. Thereafter, parties negotiated towards settlement claim. March 1992, amended acknowledging $3,537. contended pleading lacked argued does before IRS mails See 6512(b)(3)(B). Under Commissioner's 6513(b)(1), (September 1990). 5 agreed with position taken denied Citing unbroken line cases adopting similar e.g. Allen v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 475, 479-480, 1992 WL 252851 (1992); Galuska 98 661, 665, 137452 Berry 97 339, 344-345, 1991 181772 (1991); White 72 1126, 1131-1133, 1979 3852 (1979) (renumbered statute); Hosking 62 635, 642-643, 1974 2665 (1974) statute), 65 TCM 3011, 3014-3015, 1993 231736, RIA TC memo ¶ 93, 278 (1993). 6 Appeals 856, 861 (1995). Every other addressed question affirmed Court's Davison 9 1538 (C.A.2 1993) (unpublished disposition); 23 406 (C.A.6 1994) 195, 196 (C.A.7 1993); Richards 37 587, 589 (C.A.10 1994); also Rossman 46 1144 (C.A.9 1995) disposition) (affirming grounds). granted certiorari resolve conflict, 515 ----, 115 2244, 132 254 (1995), now reverse. II 7 A ordinarily must 6511.1 That contains separate provisions determining timeliness It establishes deadline: whichever periods expires no taxpayer, paid." 6511(b)(1) (incorporating 6511(a)). defines periods: If ibid., then "the portion immediately preceding claim." "portion during 8 Unlike governing suits District Federal Claims, make jurisdictional prerequisite bringing suit, 7422(a); Martin States, 833 F.2d 655, 658-659 1987), restrictions authority incorporate deadline 6511. 6512(b)(3).2 Consequently, who seeks like respondent, need IRS; show refunded provides cannot any paid: 10 (whether filed) stating grounds upon finds there overpayment." 11 analysis dictated elegant, straightforward. Though courts adverted "deemed claim," Galuska, F.3d, at 196; Richards, 589, all matters proper application treated mechanism recover incorporating 6511(b)(2), directs determine inquiring into hypothetical "on deficiency." 12 To end, attention either (B) 6511(a)); supra, __. apply, consult 6511(a) ask 6512(b)(3)(B)—a deficiency"—would deficiency. awarding 13 fails gets around late situation files point litigation, infra, __-__, offers reasons __-__. think instead requires applied. 14 reach conclusion following instructions out operative deficiency" __; No having measure window apply. default 6511(b)(2)(B), measured 15 Special rules cases, e.g., 6511(c) (extension agreement); 6511(d) (special designated items), where claiming interplay ensures obtain against asserting most filed. 6501(a) 6503(a) (1); Badaracco 464 386, 389, 392, 104 756, 759, 761, 78 549 (1984). Therefore, already (albeit perhaps faulty one), necessarily defined 6511(b)(2)(A), 16 usually operates toll otherwise deprive opportunity seek contesting accuracy previously discovers course litigation without IRS. matter, district court, 7422 6511), discovered entitlement well passed, "whether [a is] Ibid. Nor CFR 301.6402-2(b)(1) apprised precise basis claim, posits "stating overpayment," 17 treats filers returns less charitably. Whereas virtually assured event drawn filer's depends tolls But filers, Court: 18 case. As applies. III 19 deciding adopted different approach interpreting supports rationale, argument find that: 20 "[T]he limitation provision light should substitute t axpayer purpose benchmark measuring two-year three-year applies." 861. 21 words, (i.e., date), irrelevant calculating length held, terms ("[T]he return"). Thus, (taxpayer same court). 22 Contrary interpretation, fact bearing Once exclusive existence 6512(a), limited those delineated 6512(b)(3). 6512(b)(3)(C) measures based inapplicable here claims "before 6512(b)(3)(C). instructed deficiency," file. rule timely, delinquent, rule, availability turns entirely IRS, actual (and, incorporation, 6512(b)(3)(B)). 861; "eliminate[ ] inequities resulting" adhering 863, creates greater inequity dutifully initially our achieves appropriate reasonable case: regard 24 luck. arrives shortly expires, (b)(1), discover until commencement precluded passage requires. 6511(b)(2)(B); 861-862 filing). unlikely intended worse off compelled approach. 25 reading avoids unreasonable result, defective. main thrust years, itself way Brief 28, 30 (citing 301.6402-3(a)(1) incorporates cases: (and 6512(b)(3)(B)) will years; with, thus of, again Like approach, convenient effect ensuring taxpayers almost always chose use drafted statute, do term used given it. Code define "claim refund" cf. 6696(e)(2) ("For purposes 6694 6695 [t]he 'claim refund' means credit against, imposed subtitle A"), apparent whole separately extent "if (Emphasis added.) state, it, "a 27 Perhaps compelling evidence intend 6512 mean return" parallel indicates "filed plainly contemplates contends, senseless, 6696 (separately defining "return"), reason believe meant one thing 6511 something else altogether very next interrelationship close proximity "presents classic 'normal statutory construction identical words parts act meaning.' " Sullivan Stroop, 496 478, 484, 110 2499, 2504, 438 (1990) (quoting Sorenson Secretary Treasury, 475 851, 860, 106 1600, 1606, 89 855 (1986) (internal quotation marks omitted). 28 regulation cites support consistent states "[i]n general" inviting obvious separately. recognized comply regulations suffice Code, see, Kales, 314 186, 194, 214, 218, 86 L.Ed. (1941) ("notice fairly advising nature taxpayer's claim" "it formal regulations"), assume require return," said explicitly. IV 29 He Congress' broad intent drafting preserve, defeat, incongruity between suit Claims. Even inclined depart plain correctly permit barred administrative large number cases. preserve taxpayers' ability Indeed, face sometimes bar recovery. both (contrary reading, __) effect. Cf. Badaracco, U.S., 405, S.Ct., 768 (STEVENS, dissenting) ("Whatever correct standard construing surely presumption ought applicable"). deleted.) 31 disparity regard, Rev. Rul. 76-511, 1976-2 Cum. Bull. 428, 6511(b)(2)(A). Pe titioner disagrees disparity, arguing wrong considered court. Petitioner 12, 29-30 n. Miller 38 473, (1994)). 32 correct, nonetheless excuse change scheme crafted. differ many ways differences favorable forum, others may not. Compare 6213(a) relief paying assessment taxes) Flora 362 145, 177, 80 630, 647, 623 (1960) ( 1346(a)(1) full payment court); compare (Tax Court" intends refund) (1995) (claim state specificity). reveals further distinction fora, language, rationally make. discussion demonstrates, law 33 advocates "accor[d] good policy," liberty "to [the] [we] deem improvement." 398, 764. Applying Accordingly, overwithheld judgment 34 ordered. 35 dissenting. 36 THOMAS cogently explained why affirmed. I join Because warrants emphasis, add comment. my view Government's position, majority, misses forest focusing trees. predecessor 6512(b) protect interests receives later asserted overpayment. Post, expressly guard possibility lapse realizes demonstrated, read designed benefit unexpected notice—as giving arbitrary right shorten converts handicap. whom STEVENS joins, Service's longstanding (b), collected majority assumes, am prepared hold, correct. 6512(b)( 3)(B) proceedings permits certain collect although (or what fashion nothing proceeding 39 Since 1976, containing accurate claim1 pay, tax. 428 (construing "[a] shall statement setting overpayment taxpayer," simultaneously filed" net Ruling 76-511 (i) (ii) contemporaneously subsequently, 'the [be] allowable since made claim.' 29, Bull., 429). assumes ante, 6511, received rather Court.2 40 harder step Arguably, ambiguous relevant "no Ninth (1994), "[t]he payment" 41 issue difficult discern. There how being affect refund—in forum. appears correspond Government assessment. S.Rep. 1983, 85th Cong., 2d Sess., 98-99 (1958). construed subsection create assessment: Go vernment However, takes back symmetry bestows. assessments triggered return.3 These facts suggest enacting quite likely thinking about filers. Or, put another way, regarding take advantage time, correlate 42 Nevertheless, absence affirmatively prevent (but late) collecting refunds, 20-year Ruling, interpret conformity Ruling. 43 6512(b), directly governs awarded striking aspect however, 6511—it 6511(b)(2)." mind, then, (that directing pretend filed"), statute's legislative history, related indicate receiving though ordered 44 merely course. Instead, ., (emphasis added). addition somehow prevents recovery tacitly rely theories provision—that majority. "section us focus specified date—the 3014, According "requires 'take snapshot' situation" Hence, determination time—that is, inform ation real ultimately paid. majority's slightly different—in help Lundy. 'claim' [is be] refund." Ante, __-__ not, limit consideration events occurred anything, variance tenses ("would filed") normally applicability statutes limitation—with whatever information rules. 47 clear explicitly tells that, happened not" happen;4 tell ignore happen.5 say thinks said, added effect." Or directed respect mailed." __ (26 uses phrase "period [a] denoting particular claim). 48 notes 'before deficiency' provide "additional" "after" issued. Reply 3-4 original).6 argue jurisdic tion; asks cutting 49 government making expressio unius true 6512(b)(3)(B)—which claim—might render unnecessary. carve exception supposed implicit requirement recognizable one. Rather, clarify permissible. Senate Report accompanied 1962 amendment explained: 50 "Since 1954 enactment, practice interpreted [i.e., permitting amounts valid 51 "Your committee believes desirable amend present (sec. [3] )) conforms followed enactment Code." 2273, 87th (1962). 52 Rather demonstrating prohibit recognition "real" claims, Report, pre-1962 therein, opposite: (b)(3)(B) recognize 53 failed specifically subsequently return—just Although intent, any, obscure, general issues discernable. 54 First, matter 6512(b)(3)(B).7 refer 6511; instead, stated much clearly, specifying Although, noted below, clearly augment recovering obtained 55 Second, adding "if" clause favor notified owes money, effectively forced go contest together records possibly litigate Government, provided loan Government. mail too gather wits, review papers carefully, assertion petition) expiration When 322(d), 1942, House 56 "In order give privilege [Tax Court] amendments petitions allowed Court], running [§ 322(d) amended] credited H.R.Rep. 2333, 77th 121 (1942).8 57 6511(b) protective litigating 58 failing irrational forfeit "beat punch" sending notice. disagree. Allowing irrational, incentive submit calculates obligation, locates him, sends example, sent 59 What sense me, deliberately adopt i.e., punish whose cash reserves impossible still larger demands pursues unsophisticated realize expected small relation attorney's fees costs justify Obviously C ongress constitutionally strange scheme, presume done so. this; rather, (generally unrelated) insists mandates result. 60 previously, me antecedent appear written mind. hurdle cleared, makes alone, mandate part, provides: "(a) Period Claim title stamp "(b) Limitation allowance credits refunds "(1) Filing prescribed "(2) Limit "(A) (a), exceed equal plus extension stamp, "(B) "(C) subparagraph (A) (B), be, allowed." Jurisdiction Except paragraph (3) 7463, taxable year tax, overpayment, shall, decision become final, taxpayer. "(3) part — (c), (d), "(i) disallowed date, "(ii) commenced "(iii) 6532." syllabus constitutes Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 499. "accurate throughout describe (1) legally sufficient ground eventually attempts (2) enough detail allow Claims concedes constituted 301.6402-3(a)(5) (1995); "provided [his] liability." 6. agrees receive For April pay withheld. 16, 1993, superseded "deemed" invoke supersede premature preceded return) thereby claimant apparently oral nonreturn dismisses finally ground, never assuming permitted Tr. Oral Arg. 25-26. odd reads taking account paid). viable petition, get ending Service, 868 who, unlike Lundy, ret urn decided sued barring reliance meeting 6511's preventing Court). indeed ruling, incorrect. enable

Classification Label: 11