Taxing Lessons From Court Decisions

Kissing Frogs and Debt Relief

Thanks for sharing!
1 minute read

Frog Prince

Writing “paid in full” on the bottom of a check won’t relieve you of debts any more than kissing frogs will un-jinx a royal suitor. The first fairy tale stems in part from section 3-31 of the Uniform Commercial Code, a standard set of laws that governs US financial contracts.

Tax protesters routinely attempt to get the IRS to accept a smaller payment with this trick. What’s overlooked is the fine print—including the fact that there has to be a dispute, and both parties have to agree.

In the case of Kalil (T.C. Summary Opinion 2013-29), the taxpayer submitted a check for $552 for payment in full of tax obligations of more than $26,000. The IRS cashed the check—but that didn’t end the matter.

The court cited a case from 1929 (Botany Worsted Mills v. United States, 278 U.S. 282), which states “the statutes which authorize conclusive agreements and settlements to be made in particular ways and with the approval of designated officers raise the inference that adjustments or settlements made in other ways are not binding.”

In the Internal Revenue Code, sections 7121 and 7122 prescribe the exclusive means for effecting a settlement or compromise binding on both the taxpayer and the IRS commissioner—and neither of them mention a check notated “paid in full.”

If you’re wondering, those sections don’t mention kissing frogs either.

Taxing Lesson: If it sounds too good to be true, it’s probably not part of tax law.

***

Other posts you might enjoy

Decisions — To be fair   Image source: Library of Congress Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons   All may be fair in love and war, but that's not necessarily true in taxes. In TC Memo 2018-117 (Grainger), the taxpayer made noncash charitable donations and claimed a deduction for what she believed wa...
Decisions — Who’s included?   Image source: openclipart.org   Back in 2012, the tax court decided a case typically referred to as WHO515. In that case, the question was whether certain partnership tax items were included when a taxpayer agreed to an extension of the statute of limitations for a personal fed...
Decisions — Sharing the credit Image source: Photo by Sharas Kveder on Unsplash   You may be amazed by what you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit, but that's probably not the best argument to make in tax court. In T.C. Memo. 2018-81 (Caselli), the taxpayer was one of three shareholders in a subch...
Decisions — If not A, than C Image source: wpclipart.com   No, the title doesn't refer to an obscure math problem that you'll need to solve. The question to be solved in T.C. Memo. 2018-75 (Fiedziuszko) is whether the taxpayer is a statutory employee who can deduct expenses on Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Busines...
Tagged ,