United States v. Motsinger
Decision Date | 10 November 1941 |
Docket Number | No. 4811.,4811. |
Citation | 123 F.2d 585 |
Parties | UNITED STATES v. MOTSINGER. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Ellis N. Slack, Sp. Asst. to the Atty. Gen. (Samuel O. Clark, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., J. Louis Monarch, Helen R. Carloss, and S. Dee Hanson, Sp. Assts. to the Atty. Gen., and Carlisle W. Higgins, U.S. Atty., of Greensboro, N.C., on the brief), for appellant.
Winfield Blackwell, Jr., and R. C. Vaughn, both of Winston-Salem, N. C. (John S. Graham and Vaughn & Graham, all of Winston-Salem, N. C., on the brief), for appellee.
Before PARKER and SOPER, Circuit Judges and CHESNUT, District Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing, on the ground that it was barred by limitations, an action instituted by the United States under sections 3466 and 3467 of the Revised Statutes, 31 U.S.C.A. §§ 191, 192. The action was against a fiduciary to whom assets of a taxpayer had been transferred in trust and who had distributed them without paying the tax assessed against the taxpayer. It appears from the complaint that the tax was assessed against the taxpayer on April 27, 1934, and that action was commenced against the fiduciary May 2, 1940, more than six years later. The facts are thus stated in detail in paragraphs IV and V of the complaint:
Sections 3466 and 3467 of the Revised Statutes, 31 U.S.C.A. §§ 191 and 192, are as follows:
The contention of the government is that no statute of limitations is applicable to actions instituted under these sections; that the period of limitations provided by section 311(b) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, § 311(b) (3), applies only to the collection of a liability assessed against a fiduciary under section 311(a) (2); that section 311 provides merely an alternative remedy for the collection of taxes from transferees and fiduciaries; and that the limitations therein provided have application only to such alternative remedy and not to suits instituted under 3466 and 3467.
The government is correct, we think, in contending that the remedy provided by I. R. C. § 311 for collection of taxes from transferees and fiduciaries is alternative and not exclusive. Phillips v. Com'r, 283 U.S. 589, 51 S.Ct. 608, 75 L. Ed. 1289; Leighton v. United States 289 U.S. 506, 53 S.Ct. 719, 77 L.Ed. 1350; Rosenberg v. McLaughlin, 9 Cir., 66 F.2d 271, cert den Rosenberg v. Lewis, 290 U.S. 696, 54 S.Ct. 132, 78 L.Ed. 599. And it may be assumed that the limitation therein provided has application to such alternative remedy, and not to the old remedy under R. S. §§ 3466 and 3467. See opinion of Judge McDermott in United States v. Updike, 8 Cir., 32 F.2d 1, 4, 5. It by no means follows, however, that there is no statute of limitations applicable to a suit under these sections for the collection of a tax from a fiduciary. I.R.C. sec. 276(c), 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, § 276(c), provides:
There can be no question, we think, but that a suit under 3467 to hold a fiduciary liable in his own person and estate for a tax due the United States is a "proceeding in court" to collect the tax and that it may be maintained only if commenced "within six years after the assessment of the tax", as provided in the section just quoted, I.R.C. § 276(c). Directly in point is the decision of the Supreme Court in United States v. Updike 281 U.S. 489, 50 S.Ct. 367, 368, 74 L.Ed. 984. That was a suit in court to collect from stockholders of a corporation, to whom its assets had been distributed, income taxes assessed against the corporation. The six-year statute of limitations provided by section 278 of the Revenue Act of 1926, 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Acts, page 209, now section 276 of the Internal Revenue Code, was pleaded in bar of the action. The court held it applicable saying: (Italics supplied).
In point, also, is the decision in United States v. First Huntington National Bank, D.C., 34 F.Supp. 578, 581, affirmed by this court on the opinion of the court below, 117 F.2d 376. That was a suit under section 3467 of the Revised Statutes to collect an estate tax from a fiduciary that had disbursed assets without payment of the tax assessed against the estate. Suit was brought within six years of the assessment against the estate but not within the time allowed by the statute for making an assessment against the fiduciary under the alternative remedy of summary assessment provided by the statute. The government's contention that the six-year statute was the one applicable and that it ran from the assessment against the estate was sustained. The court said:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Henco Holding Corp.
...by him from a taxpayer, to the payment of income taxes owned by the latter, under the trust fund doctrine"); United States v. Motsinger , 123 F.2d 585, 588 (4th Cir. 1941) (describing section 280 of the 1926 Act as "an alternative summary method of collection by notice to the ... transferee......
-
US v. Bushlow
...States, 305 F.2d 844, 158 Ct.Cl. 115 (1962), cert. denied, 372 U.S. 968, 83 S.Ct. 1093, 10 L.Ed.2d 131 (1963); United States v. Motsinger, 123 F.2d 585 (4th Cir. 1941). Although the government does not mention any statute of limitations that applies when it sues to set aside a fraudulent co......
-
U.S. v. Moriarty
...494-95, 50 S.Ct. 367, 369, 74 L.Ed. 984 (1930), O'Hare v. United States, 878 F.2d 953, 956 (6th Cir.1989), and United States v. Motsinger, 123 F.2d 585, 589 (4th Cir.1941), all of which were cited by the district We conclude that each of these cases is distinguishable. In Updike and O'Hare,......
-
Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Aetna Auto Finance
... ... its corporate name "Aetna Auto Finance, Inc." The gist of the complaint as appellant's brief states it, was that defendant, a newly formed company, loaning money to automobile owners, and furnishing ... ...
-
Minimizing a personal representative's personal liability to pay taxes: part 1 describes tax returns, tax payment obligations, and ways in which a PR can be held personally liable for failing to adhere to the applicable federal and state requirements.
...statute does not. See FLA. SWAT. [section] 732.2055(5)(a). (30) I.R.S. Internal Revenue Manual 34.9.1.8 (3)(B). (31) US. v. Motsinger, 123 F. 2d 585 (4th Cir. 1941); BNA PORTFOLIO 638-2D: FEDERAL TAX COLLECTION PROCEDURE, VII(D) (Tax Management Inc., (32) I.R.C. [section] 6901(a)(1)(B) and ......