- 7 -
wasteful multiplicity of litigation.” Estate of Mueller v.
Commissioner, supra at 551-552; see also Crop Assoc.-1986 v.
Commissioner, supra at 200. The elements necessary to sustain a
claim for equitable recoupment require: (1) The refund or
deficiency for which recoupment is sought by way of offset be
barred by time; (2) the time-barred offset arise out of the same
transaction, item, or taxable event as the overpayment or
deficiency before the Court; (3) the transaction, item, or
taxable event have been inconsistently subjected to two taxes;
and (4) if the subject transaction, item, or taxable event
involves two or more taxpayers, there be sufficient identity of
interest between the taxpayers subject to the two taxes so that
the taxpayers should be treated as one. See Crop Assoc.-1986 v.
Commissioner, supra at 200-201; Estate of Branson v.
Commissioner, supra at 15.
Here, in conceding on brief that “petitioners would be
entitled to equitable recoupment relief if these cases were
brought before the United States District Court”, respondent
essentially concedes that petitioners have met the requisite
elements for a valid equitable recoupment claim. We further note
that a nearly identical failure to deduct pending income tax
deficiency claims, for estate tax purposes, has been held a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011