An old partner of mine would have called it “hutzpah.”
The case is ridiculous, but it does give us a chance
to review the tolling of the statute of limitations.
Let’s start:
· The
IRS has – barring unusual circumstances – only so much time to collect taxes
from you. This period is 10 years from the date of assessment. A key concept
here is that the date of assessment is not necessarily the date you filed, and
that one tax year can have more than one ten-year period running concurrently
(think an IRS audit a couple of years after you filed).
· The
10 years can be interrupted (the fifty-cent word is “tolled”) for certain
things, such as filing for an offer in compromise. This means that that 10-year
statute can stretch to much longer than 10 years in the real world.
Let’s look at the Ward case.
The IRS determined the Wards had underreported income
by $197 grand for 1996 and $209 grand for 1997. The Wards took the matter to Tax Court and lost.
The 1996 tax was assessed in November 2002.
COMMENT: Plus ten years puts one at November 2012.
The 1997 tax was assessed in December 2002.
COMMENT: Plus ten years means December 2012.
Alright, how in the world does one get to 2022 with
these dates and facts?
Let’s look at the following:
(1) Offer in compromise dated 12/27/2002
(2) Due process hearing requested 7/15/2003
(3) Offer in compromise dated 3/15/2004
(4) Offer in compromise dated 12/4/2008
(5) Due process hearing requested 12/16/2011
(6) Offer in compromise dated 3/6/2014
(7) Offer in compromise dated 9/23/2015
Five offers? This has the signature of tax protest and
will likely go poorly with the Court.
Each offer tolls the statute. The IRS has up to two
years to resolve an offer, and it is not uncommon for an offer to take a year
or more to resolve. The statute is tolled while an offer is being considered. Just
reviewing the dates quickly, the Wards added at almost seven years to the
statute.
Then we have the due process hearings.
A CDP is a Collections hearing and generally means
that the IRS wants you to pay more tax than you think you can pay. The hearing
allows one to propose a payment alternative – think a smaller monthly payment than
the IRS wants. The statute is tolled during CDP, and the IRS tacks-on another
30 days to boot after the determination.
I see that just
one of the CDPs added over a year and a half to the statute.
Add all the seven tolling events and the statute had
tolled until the summer of 2021.
Yep, the tax years were open, and the IRS could pursue
collection.
Let’s go back.
Remember I said that the Tax Court had decided the
matter?
Two of the offers were to contest the tax liability.
Let’s give some background about offers.
There are three types of offers:
(1) You
argue that you do not owe the tax (or at least as much). This is a "liability”
offer.
(2) You
argue that you cannot pay the amount due in full. Think of a “pennies on the dollar”
late-night commercial and you get the drift. This is a “collectability” offer.
(3) You argue that fair and effective and fair tax
administration requires acceptance of an offer. This third type is rare. I have
never done one in practice, although we presently have a client where I intend
to request one. The facts are extraordinary, though, and involve financial
malfeasance while the client was a minor.
A key point is that a liability offer is off the table
once the Tax Court has decided. The Wards’ first and fourth offers were
liability offers and were therefore invalid.
Still, the offers tolled the statute.
So, the Wards played a wild card: they argued that the
IRS considered two invalid offers in order to toll the statute. The IRS was
playing a cynical game to buy time, and the Wards should not be punished for the
IRS’ egregious behavior.
Hutzpah!
The Court shut them down immediately:
It was Defendants who primarily benefited from these delays. While the offers remained pending, the IRS could not collect payment on the underlying assessments…. [By] filing so many offers, [Defendants] successfully blocked collections for years.”
The statute tolled. The Wards owed. The Court had
little patience with people who knew just enough to muck-up the tax collection
process for the better part of two decades.
Our case this time was United States of America v
Walter and Virginia Ward, USDC AK, Case 3:21-cv-0056, July 6, 2022.
No comments:
Post a Comment