United States v. Reorganized CF&I Fabricators of Utah, Inc., 518 U.S. 213, 18 (1996)

Page:   Index   Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18

230

UNITED STATES v. REORGANIZED CF&I FABRICATORS OF UTAH, INC.

Opinion of Thomas, J.

nation that assessments under 26 U. S. C. § 4971(a) are not "excise taxes" within the meaning of 11 U. S. C. § 507(a)(7)(E) (1988 ed.). I would hold that every congressionally enacted tax that is generally considered an excise tax is entitled to bankruptcy priority under § 507(a)(7)(E).

Section 507(a)(7)(E) creates a bankruptcy priority for excise taxes. Congress, in enacting § 4971, purported to enact a tax, see 26 U. S. C. § 4971(a) ("[T]here is hereby imposed a tax . . ."), and the tax it enacted is properly considered an excise tax. See Commissioner v. Keystone Consol. Industries, Inc., 508 U. S. 152, 161 (1993) (stating, in dicta, that § 4971 imposes an excise tax). It is true that New Jersey v. Anderson, 203 U. S. 483 (1906), and its progeny held that whether a state assessment is entitled to bankruptcy priority as a tax is a federal question. See id., at 492; City of New York v. Feiring, 313 U. S. 283, 285 (1941). It is not appropriate, however, for federal courts to perform a similar inquiry into valid taxes passed by Congress, and the majority cites no case in which this Court has denied bankruptcy priority to a congressionally enacted tax. I respectfully dissent.

Page:   Index   Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18

Last modified: October 4, 2007