United States: U.S. Tax Court: 90 Days Is 90 Days, Shutdown Or Not

On October 1, 2013, the majority of the U.S. government shut down, including the U.S. Tax Court.  Despite the shutdown, the statutory deadline for filing a petition in the Tax Court cannot be extended.  Under these circumstances, the mailbox rule is the taxpayer's only hope.

On October 1, 2013, the U.S. government shutdown caused the U.S. Tax Court to close its doors.  Under Section 6213(a), however, the 90-day statutory deadline for filing a petition in the Tax Court cannot be extended.  During the shutdown, the Tax Court is not accepting hand delivery and likely is not opening its mail.  Under these circumstances, the mailbox rule is the taxpayer's only means to ensure that the Tax Court has jurisdiction over the taxpayer's case.

Background

Generally a taxpayer has 90 days from the date of the Statutory Notice of Deficiency or Statutory Notice of Determination to file a petition in the Tax Court.  Sections 6213(a); 6330(d)(1).  Without a timely filed petition, the Tax Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the taxpayer's case and the taxpayer loses the Tax Court as a forum in which to litigate.  The remaining litigation forums require the taxpayer to pay the disputed tax, penalties and interest and sue for refund. 

Barring the government shutdown, a taxpayer can file the petition either by mail or by hand delivery.  Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rule) 26 (establishing rules for electronic filing and specifically exempting "petitions and other papers not eligible for electronic filing"); Rule 34 ("the signed original of each petition is required to be filed").  A statutory filing requirement generally can be satisfied only by actual physical delivery to the government—a principle commonly called the "physical delivery rule."  United States v. Lombardo, 241 U.S. 73, 76 (1916).  When the Tax Court receives a petition prior to the 90th day, the physical delivery rule is satisfied.  However, if the petition is received after the deadline, the taxpayer must look to the common-law "mailbox rule" and the statutory "postmark rule" of Section 7502 to determine if it has satisfied the physical delivery requirement.  The Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure expressly reference Section 7502, stating that "In all cases, the jurisdiction of the Court also depends on the timely filing of a petition.  See Code sections 6213 and 7502."  Rule 13(c).

Under the common-law mailbox rule, when a taxpayer offers evidence that it sent documents to the government (e.g., the Internal Revenue Service or Tax Court) in a properly addressed and stamped envelope through the U.S. Postal Service, courts will presume that the documents were received within the customary time for mail delivery.  Philadelphia Marine Trade Assoc. v. Commissioner, 523 F.3d 140, 147 (3rd Cir. 2008).  The mailbox rule is a method of satisfying the physical delivery requirement.  Once proof is sufficiently established, the presumption is that the government received the document, but the government then has the opportunity to rebut this presumption with evidence of untimely receipt.  Hagner v. United States, 285 U.S. 427, 430 (1932). 

In 1954, Congress enacted Section 7502 of the Internal Revenue Code and created a postmark rule to satisfy the physical delivery requirement.  The relevant part of section 7502(a) provides:

If any return, claim, statement, or other document required to be filed, or any payment required to be made, within a prescribed period or on or before a prescribed date under authority of any provision of the internal revenue laws is, after such period or such date, delivered by United States mail to the agency, officer, or office with which such return, claim, statement, or other document is required to be filed, or to which such payment is required to be made, the date of the United States postmark stamped on the cover in which such return, claim, statement, or other document, or payment, is mailed shall be deemed to be the date of delivery or the date of payment, as the case may be.

If the mailed document is lost or the post-marked envelope is not retained, then Section 7502(c) provides that proof of registered mail or certified mail constitutes prima facie evidence that the document was received.  Moreover, the date of registration or the postmark on the certified receipt constitutes the postmark date and also the delivery date.

Because the Tax Court currently is not accepting hand deliveries, the common-law mailbox rule and statutory postmark rule may provide the sole means for a taxpayer to satisfy the physical delivery requirement for timely filing petitions during the shutdown.  Taxpayers and practitioners must pay careful attention to the requirements to prove timely filing via the mailbox rule, because even a small foot fault will deprive the Tax Court of subject-matter jurisdiction. 

Proving the Mailbox Rule and the Circuit Split

Currently the U.S. courts of appeals are split as to whether extrinsic evidence may be presented to establish proof of a timely mailing (i.e., whether the taxpayer may present any evidence other than a receipt from the post office or approved private delivery service, or the actual postmark).  The U.S Courts of Appeals for the Eighth, Ninth and Tenth Circuits have adopted rules that allow the taxpayer to introduce extrinsic evidence that it in fact timely mailed the petition.  See Estate of Wood v. Commissioner, 909 F.2d 1155 (8th Cir. 1990), aff'g 92 T.C. 793 (1989); Anderson v. United States, 966 F.2d 487 (9th Cir. 1992); Sorrentino v. Internal Revenue Service, 383 F.3d 1187 (10th Cir. 2004).  The Second and Sixth Circuits have held that if the taxpayer cannot show an actual postmark, section 7502 is not "literally applicable" and the court cannot accept "testimony or other evidence as proof of actual date of mailing."  Deutsch v. Commissioner, 599 F.2d 44, 46 (2d Cir. 1979); Miller v. United States, 784 F.2d 728, 730-31 (6th Cir. 1986).

The most recent opinion to discuss the mailbox rule and the major hurdles a taxpayer must jump over in order to satisfy the evidentiary requirements of the mailbox rule is Stocker v. United States, No. 11-1890 (6th Cir. 2013).  Under the current jurisprudence of the Sixth Circuit, the taxpayer may only prove the mailbox rule by showing either a receipt from the post office (or other acceptable delivery service) or the actual postmark-stamped envelope.

Stocker v. United States

In Stocker v. United States, the taxpayers' accountant determined that the Stockers had overpaid their taxes for the 2003 tax year and prepared amended federal and state tax returns for Mr. Stocker to mail.  The accountant also prepared the Stockers' 2006 federal and state returns.  Each of those returns was due on October 15, 2007, the original 2003 return having been filed on October 15, 2004, under an extension, and the 2006 returns having been twice extended.  The accountant's assistant prepared postage-paid, certified mail, return-receipt-requested envelopes for the 2003 amended returns and regular postage prepaid envelopes for the 2006 returns; however, she accidentally retained the customer copies of the certified mail receipts for the 2003 amended returns.   

Mr. Stocker testified that he took his returns directly to the post office on October 15, 2007, and mailed all of the returns.  Mr. Stocker explained that he was unable to obtain the date-stamped receipts for the 2003 amended returns because he did not have the customer copies of the certified mail receipts.

The Stockers' 2003 and 2006 state tax returns were timely received by the Michigan Department of Treasury, and the 2006 federal return was timely received by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).  However, the IRS claimed that it did not receive the 2003 amended return until October 25, 2007.  The IRS did not retain the envelope, and the IRS's records stated that the envelope had a postmark dated October 19, 2007.

The government disallowed the Stockers' claim for refund contending that the 2003 amended return was untimely.  The Sixth Circuit agreed, explaining that there are only two exceptions to the common law rule requiring actual physical delivery.  The exceptions, found in section 7502, indicate that delivery to the U.S. mail shall be deemed as delivery to the IRS, and that if the return is sent by U.S. mail, the postmark shall be the date of "registration."  Because the Stockers could not produce a receipt verifying delivery to the post office or a postmark dated prior to the due date, they could not avail themselves of the exceptions of section 7502.  The Sixth Circuit found that the taxpayers could not produce extrinsic evidence outside of the exact requirements of section 7502 and elected "to follow the decisions of other courts holding that the 'exceptions embodied in [§7502] [a]re exclusive and complete.'"

Current Ramifications

Shortly after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit decided Sorrentino, the IRS issued proposed regulations to eliminate the use of extrinsic evidence to prove the mailbox rule.  These regulations were revised and finalized in Treasury Regulation 301.7502-1(e)(2)(i), which states:

In the case of a document (but not a payment) sent by registered or certified mail, proof that the document was properly registered or that a postmarked certified mail sender's receipt was properly issued and that the envelope was properly addressed to the agency, officer, or office constitutes prima facie evidence that the document was delivered to the agency, officer, or office.  Other than direct proof of actual delivery, proof of proper use of registered or certified mail, and proof of proper use of a duly designated [private delivery service] as provided for by paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, are the exclusive means to establish prima facie evidence of delivery of a document to the agency, officer, or office with which the document is required to be filed.  No other evidence of a postmark or of mailing will be prima facie evidence of delivery or raise a presumption that the document was delivered.

Whether the Tax Court will apply the statutory postmark rule as the exclusive means to establish prima facie delivery of the petition to the Tax Court is unclear.  In two recent cases, the Tax Court cited to the new Treasury Regulations; however, each case involved the date on which a return or form was filed with the IRS, not the date on which a petition was filed with the Tax Court.  For example, in Tesoriero v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2012-261 at *7, the court applied the law of the Second Circuit—the circuit to which the case was appealable—which already does not allow extrinsic evidence.  In Herrera v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2012-308 at *21 n. 12, the court mentions the Treasury Regulations, but declines to discuss the issue, finding that "even if extrinsic evidence were allowed, petitioners did not meet their burden of proof."  

The Tax Court has previously allowed taxpayers to introduce extrinsic evidence, such as testimony, to establish that they mailed a return to the IRS.  Estate of Wood v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 793, 799 (1989), aff'd 909 F.2d 1155 (8th Cir. 1990).  While Treasury Regulation 301.7502-1(e)(2)(i) has established Section 7502 as the exclusive means to satisfy the physical delivery rule, Section 7502 and the regulations are by their terms limited to documents "addressed to the agency, officer or office" and do not expressly refer to documents addressed to the Tax Court.  It is also important to note that the Tax Court will apply the rule of the court of appeals to which the case it is trying is appealable.  Golsen v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 742 (1970) aff'd on other issues 445 F.2d 985 (10th Cir. 1971).  Therefore, it is particularly important for taxpayers and practitioners to understand the rule in their circuit, and it may be prudent to stipulate appellate jurisdiction to a jurisdiction most favorable to the kind of evidence the taxpayer possesses.  Taxpayers and practitioners can avoid the circuit split evidentiary issues by retaining the receipt for certified or registered mail, or from an approved private delivery service.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions