Palm Beach Business Attorney
Main Office: 561-626-4700/
SE HABLA ESPAÑOL/
Email: info@businessminded...

The IRS, Bankruptcy and You

Federal income tax discharge. In certain circumstances, individual income taxes may be discharged in bankruptcy. It is important to understand the crossover effect between Bankruptcy Code section 507(a)(7)(A)(i) and Bankruptcy Code section 523(a)(1)(a). By reading these sections together, one can discern that income taxes arising from a tax year for which the tax return was last due at least three years prior to the date of the filing of the petition are potentially dischargeable. The operative words here are “last due” and “potentially dischargeable.”

It is important to determine whether a debtor filed an extension of the deadline for filing his or her tax return. If one files the petition on April 16th, believing that the debtor will be able to discharge the taxes arising from the tax year three years past, he or she will be denied a discharge if that return had been on extension. Discharge emanates from the date when the return was “last due.”

Taxes that otherwise seem dischargeable under the three-year rule might not be, due to a number of other factors discussed below.

Recent assessments. Please note that Bankruptcy Code sections 507 and 523 cross reference each other. A joint reading suggests that the income tax liability for the year or years in question must not have been assessed within 240 days of the date of the bankruptcy filing. Even if the three year rule has been met, the tax liability itself must have been assessed more than 240 days ago.

It sometimes takes the IRS a long time to assess delinquent taxes. It cannot be assumed that just because the unpaid taxes arose many years ago, they were also assessed many years ago.

A further reading of Bankruptcy Code section 507 indicates that there cannot be a discharge where there is an outstanding offer in compromise, or if less than 30 days had elapsed since it was withdrawn or rejected.

Tax Court litigation. Taxes that otherwise would be eligible for discharge are excluded from dischargeability if the taxpayer is currently engaged in litigation in Tax Court with respect to such liability (Bankruptcy Code sections 507(a)(7)(a)(iii) and 523(a)(1)(A)) or if the taxpayer, in the context of a settlement or workout arrangement, agreed to extend the limitations period on the assessment or collection of such taxes.

Late-filed returns. What if the debtor meets all standards for dischargeability, but filed returns late, or not at all?

If the return was never filed, the tax may not be discharged. Debtors have argued that “substitute returns” prepared by the IRS under authority of Code Sec. 6020 entitled them to discharge as if they had filed the tax return themselves. The courts have consistently rejected this. (See In re Bergstrom, 949 F2d 341 (CA-10, 1991)). To be eligible, the return must be signed by the debtor. Courts have also rejected “protest” returns as not satisfying the standard for having filed a return. (See In Re Slater, 96 Bkrptcy. Rpt. 867 (Bkrptcy, DC Ill., 1989)).

A debtor can be discharged for taxes even if the return is late filed, if at least two years have passed since the filing, and all other conditions for discharge have been met. (Bankruptcy Code Section 523(a)(1)(B)).

Willful evasion or fraudulent returns. Most litigation regarding the dischargeability of individual taxes relates to the issue of whether the debtor filed a fraudulent return or whether the taxpayer attempted in any manner to evade or defeat the payment of taxes. Under Bankruptcy Code section 523(a)(1)(C), the evasion must be willful. What constitutes “willful evasion” has been the subject of much court interpretation and the threshold for a finding of willfulness is a high one: a finding of affirmative acts seeking to evade or defeat collection of taxes.

Litigating the tax discharge. Assuming the debtor has satisfied all of the criteria for dischargeability and the court issues its standard blanket discharge order, is it safe to assume that he or she need no longer be concerned with  IRS enforcement? The answer is a resounding “no.” The better practice is to file an adversary proceeding under Bankruptcy Rule 7001 seeking a declaratory determination that the specific taxes at issue are discharged by operation of law.

Under Code Sec. 7491(a), the IRS has the absolute burden of proof on all matters in such proceedings. Obtaining a specific court order as to dischargeabilty is the best safeguard from future collection action and prevents the client from having to move to reopen the bankruptcy case years down the road.

Markarian & Hayes
Markarian & Hayes is located in Palm Beach, Wellington & Vero Beach, Florida and serves clients across Florida from Vero Beach to the Florida Keys, including those in and around Palm Beach, West Palm Beach, Pahokee, Delray Beach, Loxahatchee, Coral Springs, Boca Raton, Boynton Beach, Lake Worth, Deerfield Beach, South Bay, Pompano Beach, Hobe Sound, Stuart, Port St. Lucie, Sebastian, Fort Pierce, Hollywood, Tampa, Tallahassee, Orlando, Martin County, Broward County, Hillsborough County, Leon County, Palm Beach County, Fort Lauderdale, Miami-Dade County and Sebastian. The firm’s lawyers also have a long history representing clients’ interests throughout the Caribbean.
2017 Markarian & Hayes. All rights reserved.
Contact Form Tab