- 9 -
Fund v. H.F. Johnson, Inc., 830 F.2d 1009, 1016-1017 (9th Cir.
1987).
The Supreme Court has held that the United States is not
bound by State statutes of limitation in enforcing its rights.
For instance, in United States v. Summerlin, 310 U.S. 414 (1940),
the Supreme Court held that the United States' claim against the
estate of a deceased could not be extinguished under a State law
imposing an 8-month time limit on filing claims against the
estate. See Bresson v. Commissioner, 111 T.C. 172 (1998).
Similarly, the Supreme Court has recognized that Federal statutes
of limitation override conflicting State laws. For example, in
Herget v. Central Bank Co., 324 U.S. 4 (1945), the Supreme Court
held that a trustee in bankruptcy was precluded from attempting
to set aside and recover a preferential transfer by virtue of the
2-year statute of limitations applicable under Federal law, i.e.,
the Bankruptcy Code, in spite of the trustee’s argument that
State law allowed a 5-year period of limitations for such
actions. Consistent with these cases, we hold that the 3-year
statute of limitations set forth in section 6501(a) is
controlling in this case.
Our holding on this point is based on sound policy
considerations. The various statutes of limitation that Congress
has enacted under the Internal Revenue Code, and particularly
section 6501, are essential to our nation’s tax system which is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011