IRS Practice and Procedure News Briefs for July 2021

Joshua A. Nesser • July 27, 2021
A wooden judge 's gavel is sitting on top of a tax law book.


LATE-FILING PENALTIES – Lindsay v. U.S., Case No. 20-50994 (5th Cir. 2021)


Why this Case is Important: Taxpayers often believe that once they give a third party authority to file their tax return, they have fulfilled their obligation to file their return on time and can avoid being penalized for any late filing that is the third party’s fault. That is not the case.


Facts: In Lindsay, the taxpayer was incarcerated. He signed a power of attorney authorizing his accountant to manage his affairs during his incarceration, including filing his tax returns. Between 2012 and 2015, the attorney assured the taxpayer that his returns were being filed on time. Unfortunately for the taxpayer, the attorney never filed those returns and embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from the taxpayer. When the taxpayer eventually realized this, he filed his past-due returns. The IRS assessed over $425,000 in late-filing penalties. The taxpayer paid the penalties and filed suit in District Court requesting that the penalties be waived and refunded to him. The District Court found in favor of the IRS and the taxpayer appealed.


Law and Conclusion: Under Section 6651(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, taxpayers are subject to penalties for failing to file returns on time unless the failure was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. Over time, the penalty can grow to as high as 25% of the unpaid tax due with the return. To demonstrate that reasonable cause exists for failure to timely file a return, an individual must demonstrate that he or she exercised ordinary business care and prudence but was unable to file the return on time due to circumstances outside of his or her control. While taxpayers often argue that they relied on a third party to file their return on time and that third party was to blame for the non-filing, the Supreme Court rejected this argument in the case of United States v. Boyle. In that case, the Supreme Court held that a taxpayer’s duty to file a tax return on time cannot be delegated, and that unlike cases where taxpayers rely on tax advice from experts to their detriment, occasionally warranting penalty abatement, “one does not have to be a tax expert to know that tax returns have fixed filing dates…” Relying on the holding in Boyle, the Appeals Court rejected the taxpayer’s argument and upheld the District Court’s decision in favor of the IRS.




IRS COLLECTION BEYOND STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS – Dean v. U.S., Case No. 20-14421 (11th. Cir. 2021)


Why this Case is Important: While the IRS generally has ten years from the date a return is filed to collect unpaid taxes, as this case demonstrates, in certain circumstances, the IRS is permitted to continue collecting even once that ten-year window has expired.


Facts: In Dean, the taxpayer owed the IRS over $2 million with respect to his 1997 through 2005 tax returns. The liabilities were assessed in 2007, meaning that the IRS generally had until sometime in 2017 to collect the liabilities. The IRS filed a tax lien against the taxpayer and, in 2013, began levying 100% of the taxpayer’s Social Security benefits. In 2017, with the statute of limitations on IRS collections expiring, the IRS released its tax lien and abated the assessments against the taxpayer. However, it continued to levy the taxpayer’s Social Security benefits. Believing that the levy should have been released, the taxpayer filed suit in District Court seeking a refund of $64,000 that the IRS had levied following the expiration of the statute of limitations. When the District Court found in favor of the IRS, the taxpayer appealed.

 

Law and Analysis: Under Section 6501(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, the IRS has ten years from the date a tax liability is assessed to collect it, though that ten-year period can be extended in certain circumstances. Treasury Regulations make clear that a levy served after this ten-year period expires must be released, and that a continuing levy on salary or wages must be released when the ten-year period expires. However, those regulations also state that “a levy on a fixed and determinable right to payment, which right includes payments to be made after the period of limitations expires, does not become unenforceable upon the expiration of the period of limitations and will not be released under this condition unless the liability is satisfied.” As the Appeals Court explained, once individuals start collecting Social Security benefits, they have a fixed and determinable right to payment of their entire benefit – payment of the benefit is guaranteed and the amount to be paid is fixed. That being the case, when the IRS issued its levy on the taxpayer’s Social Security, it levied his fixed and determinable right to payment of the entire benefit, which was to be paid in monthly installments. Because this levy of his entire benefit was issued prior to the collection statute of limitations expiring, the IRS was not required to release the levy when the statute did expire. Therefore, the Appeals Court upheld the District Court’s decision and ruled in favor of the IRS.

 

If you would like more details about these cases, please contact me at 312-888-4113 or jnesser@lavellelaw.com.

More News & Resources

Lavelle Law News and Events

The Junk Fee Ban Act and pricing transparency legislation.
By Sarah J. Reusché and Jacob Rotolo April 23, 2025
If enacted, the Junk Fee Ban Act would protect consumers from hidden fees and promote fair business practices in Illinois. While there has yet to be legislation in the proposed Junk Fee Ban Act that excludes dealerships, it will be important to look for future updates on this bill, as Illinois is quickly becoming a hub for vehicle innovation and automotive plant expansion.
Ancillary probate is required when a person dies owning real estate outside of their home state.
By Heather A. McCollum April 21, 2025
When someone passes away owning property in another state, their estate may need to go through ancillary probate—a secondary court process in that state.
$9.9 Million Dollar Purchase of Packaged Multi-Unit Properties
By Commercial Real Estate April 18, 2025
Lavelle Law represented a joint venture in its $9.9 million acquisition of four multi-unit buildings.
Type F Reorg offers a means of achieving structural change while preserving tax continuity
By Steven A. Migala and Nathan P. Toy April 14, 2025
A Type F reorganization (“F Reorg”), governed by Section 368(a)(1)(F) of the Internal Revenue Code, provides a strategically significant mechanism for corporate restructuring. Defined as a “mere change in identity, form, or place of organization of one corporation,” an F Reorg permits a corporation to alter its legal existence while being treated for federal tax purposes as the same entity. This recharacterization allows for the uninterrupted preservation of tax attributes while maintaining shareholder continuity.
Estate Planning for Your Pet: Securing Your Pet’s Future with a Pet Trust
By Jackie R. Luthringshausen April 10, 2025
When it comes to estate planning, most people think about providing for their loved ones—but what about the furry, feathered, or scaled members of your family? In the United States, 68% of households own at least one pet, according to the American Pet Products Association’s 2023-2024 National Pet Owners Survey. For many, pets are more than just companions—they’re family. Ensuring their care after your death or incapacity is a vital part of comprehensive estate planning. In Illinois, a Pet Trust offers a powerful solution to guarantee your pet’s well-being long after you’re gone.
IRS Press Release Addresses Payment Plan Options
By Timothy M. Hughes April 10, 2025
IRS Press Release Addresses Payment Plan Options - A recent press release by the IRS addressed the options that are available to taxpayers who may owe more on April 15th than they can pay. The IRS advised taxpayers that they do not need to wait until April 15 to file their 2024 federal return, and if they owe and are unable to pay the balance in full, there are payment plans available to help them pay their tax obligation.
Learn about essential legal protections to strengthen your business and safeguard your interests.
By Lavelle Law April 9, 2025
Join us on May 21 in Schaumburg for an engaging Breakfast Briefs seminar, delving into vital strategies to fortify your business. This session will explore the critical role of crafting ironclad non-compete agreements, shielding your trade secrets, and mastering the nuances of temporary restraining orders (TROs) and injunctive relief. Our presenters, attorneys Matthew Sheahin and Jennifer Tee, bring a wealth of experience in this legal domain. Seize this chance to bolster your company’s legal protections and lay a solid groundwork for enduring success!
FinCEN Eliminates BOI Reporting Obligations!
By Frank P. Portera March 25, 2025
On March 21, 2025, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued its interim final rule stating that those entities previously classified as "domestic reporting companies" are now exempt from all BOI reporting requirements. On the other hand, all foreign entities registered to do business in the USA must file their own initial BOI reports within 30 days of the initial final rule's publication, if they have not done so already.
Join us April 3, 2025 for Business After Hours 5-7 PM
By Lavelle Law March 19, 2025
Spring is here, and with baseball season kicking off, we’re stepping up to the plate with our annual Lavelle Law Business After Hours event. We’re excited to partner with our friends in the Schaumburg business community for an evening of networking, good vibes, and a few surprises—all hosted in the friendly confines of our Schaumburg office. Bonus points: Feel free to rock your favorite baseball team’s gear and show off your fandom while you’re at it!
Delaware Court  Provides the Standard of Supreme Review for the Redomestication of Corporations
By Steven A. Migala and Anthony Letto March 12, 2025
Delaware corporations seeking to redomesticate to another state should be advised that on February 4, 2025, the Delaware Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision in Palkon v. Maffei, C.A. No. 2023-0449-JTL, addressing a challenge to TripAdvisor's redomestication from a Delaware corporation to a Nevada corporation. The case raised important questions regarding the standard of review applicable to such reincorporations, particularly when fiduciaries may derive a benefit from shifting to a legal regime perceived as more friendly.
More Posts