In re Frank

Decision Date13 January 1939
PartiesIn re FRANK.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

Krause, Hirsch & Levin, of New York City, for trustee.

Lamar Hardy, U. S. Atty., of New York City (Samuel Brodsky, Asst. U. S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for the United States.

PATTERSON, District Judge.

The government filed claim against a bankrupt estate for $536.74 and interest, for tax liability under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 301 et seq. The trustee in bankruptcy conceded that the claim was entitled to the priority given to taxes by section 64b of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 104(b). But the government demanded a better position for part of the claim. It asserted that to the extent of $96.23, the amount withheld by the bankrupt from her employees as their tax, there was a trust or lien attaching to the entire assets of the estate. The $96.23 admittedly could not be identified or traced into any specific property that came into the trustee's hands. The referee rejected the claim of a trust or lien against the entire estate.

The Social Security Act, in section 801, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1001, imposes a tax on employees of a percentage of their wages. By section 802, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1002, the tax "shall be collected by the employer of the taxpayer, by deducting the amount of the tax from the wages as and when paid. Every employer required so to deduct the tax is hereby made liable for the payment of such tax * * *". By section 807, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1007, certain provisions of the Revenue Act of 1934, among them section 607, are made applicable to the tax on employees. Section 607 of the Revenue Act of 1934, 26 U.S.C.A. § 1551, on which the government places its reliance, provides: "Whenever any person is required to collect or withhold any internal-revenue tax from any other person and to pay such tax over to the United States the amount of tax so collected or withheld shall be held to be a special fund in trust for the United States. The amount of such fund shall be assessed, collected, and paid in the same manner and subject to the same provisions and limitations (including penalties) as are applicable with respect to the taxes from which such fund arose."

In this case the bankrupt withheld $96.23 from her employees for their tax. She did not place the money in a special account or deposit. She used it as her own in her business, and the money cannot now be traced or followed into any particular property or asset in the bankrupt estate.

The government's argument is that by force of section 607 of the Revenue Act of 1934 it has what in effect is a lien on the entire estate of one who is required by law to collect or withhold any tax from another person and who fails to make the required payment to the government. I find no merit in the argument. There are a number of instances in the tax law where the duty of collecting or withholding a tax in behalf of the government is cast upon a person. The courts had held that the collecting or withholding agent became a debtor to the taxing unit and that on his bankruptcy a claim for the taxes collected or withheld was not entitled to priority. See In re...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • In re Heintzelman Const. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of New York
    • June 27, 1940
    ...Ry. Co., 8 Cir., 80 F.2d 32, 102 A.L.R. 688; In re A. D. Matthews' Sons, 2 Cir., 238 F. 785; In re Brown, 2 Cir., 193 F. 24; In re Frank, D.C., 25 F. Supp. 1005; Bradford v. Chase National Bank of City of New York, D.C., 24 F. Supp. It does not seem that any of these presents facts comparab......
  • Frederick v. Baxter Arms Corporation
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • January 16, 1939
    .......         IV. The conveyance of the said real estate by Elizabeth Bunge to the defendant Baxter Arms Corporation was not a conveyance of her own individual property, but of property of which the equitable and beneficial owners were her mother, Marie Bunge, and her brother, Frank L. Bunge. .         V. The said conveyance was not made with intent to hinder, delay and defraud creditors of the said Elizabeth Bunge. .         VI. The defendant is entitled to judgment against the plaintiff, dismissing the complaint on the merits, with costs. . ......
  • In re Independent Automobile Forwarding Corp.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • March 17, 1941
    ...taxes actually collected or withheld. Even if they had been, only what could be traced could have constituted a trust fund. In re Frank, D.C., 25 F.Supp. 1005. The remaining question involves the meaning of the credit provisions of § 902 (a) of the Social Security Act as amended Aug. 10, 19......
  • Hercules Service Parts Corp. v. United States
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • April 2, 1953
    ...Government, like any other beneficiary, may not establish a lien spread over the estate of the debtor in absence of tracing. In re Frank, D.C., 25 F.Supp. 1005. However, this is not a case in which the diversion took place prior to reorganization proceedings. In such case the tracing of the......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT