Daniel v. United States

179 F. Supp. 679, 5 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 616, 1960 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3579
CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama
DecidedJanuary 8, 1960
DocketCiv. A. No. 8740
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 179 F. Supp. 679 (Daniel v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Daniel v. United States, 179 F. Supp. 679, 5 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 616, 1960 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3579 (N.D. Ala. 1960).

Opinion

LYNNE, Chief Judge.

Plaintiffs (taxpayers), for five consecutive years beginning with the year 1951, operated a farm in Kentucky and sustained losses in that venture in excess of $50,000 for each of such taxable years. The total amounts of these losses were allowed as deductions on taxpayers’ returns for each of the years 1951 through [680]*6801954. At the close of the year 1955, pursuant to Section 270 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. § 270, taxpayers filed amended returns for each of the years 1951 through 1954, reporting deficiencies resulting from the disallowance of all such losses in excess of $50,-000 for each of such years. These additional taxes were paid. On November 30, 1956, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue assessed interest on such additional taxes for each of the years 1951 through 1954, calculating such interest from the due date of the return for each year involved. This additional interest was paid by taxpayers. Taxpayers timely filed a claim for refund of such interest, urging as grounds for such recovery that the due date of the tax did not arise until April 15, 1956, the due date of their return for the year 1955.1 This claim was disallowed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and this suit followed.

Contending that interest was not properly chargeable and the payment which plaintiffs made pursuant to the demand of the Commissioner therefor constituted an illegal exaction from them, plaintiffs quote from an article appearing in Volume XXIX of the Notre Dame Lawyer, at page 413, dealing with “The Hobby Losses Section of the Internal Revenue Code” (1939) the following:

* * * incidentally it could be argued from a literal reading of Sections 130(b), 130(c), 292(a) and 56(a) that the taxpayer would have to pay interest on each of these deficiencies computed from the time when the tax to which it relates was initially due. However, this result is so incongruous and so contrary to the basic concept of interest that it is doubtful that it would ever seriously be urged, or, if urged, accepted.”

As shall appear, at least for the present, the author of that article must be regarded as a good scribe but a bad prophet.

On its part, the defendant insists that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue was required under the applicable statutes of the Internal Revenue Codes of 1939 and 1954 to assess interest on the deficiencies from the due date of the taxpayers’ return for each of the years 1951 through 1954.

Agreeing with the defendant, the court is of the opinion that the result for which it contends flows freely and naturally from the provisions of Section 270,2 In[681]*681ternal Revenue Code of 1954, which applies when the five consecutive taxable years include at least one year to which subtitle A applies. Subtitle A applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1953. Section 7851(a) (1), Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. § 7851(a) (1). Its provisions are subsfcan-tially similar to those of its predecessor,

Section 130 3 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939.

it cannot be doubted that it was within the competence of the Congress to establish a ceiling on permissible deductions for losses sustained by a taxpayer in a business conducted as a hobby and not for profit. It has done this in Section 270 and its predecessor, Section 130, [682]*682which first appeared in the Revenue Act of 1948.

To guard against the frustration of its intent in difficult factual situations which might otherwise have confronted the courts, it devised a conclusive presumption that, if losses are consecutive for five years, the venture was not undertaken in the first instance with the primary intention of making a profit. The limit placed upon permissible deductions is clearly defined.

The provisions of Section 270(c) and (d) are explicit that the increase in tax resulting from the recomputation of taxable income for each of the years involved shall be assessed and collected as a deficiency for each such taxable year.

In both of the Revenue Codes under consideration there are a number of provisions, the application of which may result in deficiencies dependent wholly upon subsequent events not determinable at the time the return was filed. In recognition of the general statutory scheme that otherwise the assessment of deficiencies of prior shears based upon subsequent occurrences would bear interest, the Congress has occasionally expressly provided for nonpayment of interest on deficiencies thus arising.4

No provision in either Code has been called to the attention of the court, the court has found none, which excepts the deficiencies arising from the application ■of Section 270 from the interest provisions of either Code.

The long and the short of the matter is that on the due date of their return for each -of the years involved, plaintiffs owed more taxes than they paid because the subsequent events spelled out in Section 270 thereafter occurred. The Congress has not excused payment of interest for use of this money by plaintiffs; this court may not do so. Manning v. Seeley Tube & Box Co., 338 U.S. 561, 566, 70 S.Ct. 386, 94 L.Ed. 346.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pallister v. United States
182 F. Supp. 720 (S.D. New York, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
179 F. Supp. 679, 5 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 616, 1960 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3579, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-v-united-states-alnd-1960.