TC Summary Opinion 2016-25 was filed on May 26, 2016, McAuliffe v. Commissioner. The main takeaway from this case is probably do not let your parole officer (who works part-time at H&R Block) handle your taxes. But there are several other interesting points.
The taxpayer went to jail in 2003 for mail fraud and money laundering. He believed his parole officer/H&R Block employee had filed his 2003 tax return. In 2007, he received a notice of deficiency for 2003 when the IRS filed an SFR under 6020(b).
The court did not believe that his return was filed in 2004, so the date of the taxpayer's claim for refund was in 2008, when he challenged the notice of deficiency.
During 2003, his only taxes paid were withholdings from an employer. These are deemed paid on April 15, 2004. Since the claim for refund was in 2008, this is more than two years from the date tax was paid. As such, the taxpayer could not get a refund.
The taxpayer brought up one final argument, that not getting his refund is not fair. Per the court, "Suffice it to say that the Supreme Court of the United States has clearly instructed that limitations on allowance of refunds and credits prescribed by section 6511 and 6512 shall be given effect, consistent with congressional intent, without regard to an individual's perceived notion of fairness. Commissioner v. Lundy, 516 U.S. 235." So, when client want refunds when it has past the SOL, this is a great case to cite for them.
Relevant Cites:
McAuliffe v. Commissioner, TC Summary 2016-25
No comments:
Post a Comment