- 51 - whether the United States’ tax lien had priority over other claims to funds held in the name of a third party. The United States claimed the third party was the alter ego of the taxpayer/debtor, and that its tax lien therefore attached to the funds. The court agreed with the United States. Petitioner apparently relies on the following footnote in the Diversified Metal opinion to support his position: The Internal Revenue Service, and not the United States, was originally named as defendant in this action. However, the United States is correct that the Internal Revenue Service has no capacity to sue or be sued. Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512, 514, 96 L. Ed. 534, 72 S. Ct. 410 (1952). Therefore, the United States is properly substituted for the Internal Revenue Service in this action. [Id. at 5832 n.3, 96-2 USTC par. 50,437, at 85,462 n.3.8] In Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512 (1952), a discharged employee of the Veterans Administration sued the United States Civil Service Commission for reinstatement. The Court held that “Congress has not constituted the Commission a body corporate or authorized it to be sued eo nomine.” Id. at 514. The Court also stated “When Congress authorizes one of its agencies to be sued eo nomine, it does so in explicit language, or impliedly because the agency is the offspring of such a suable entity.” Id. at 515. By citing Blackmar in support of its decision that the 8On brief, petitioner grossly mischaracterizes this footnote as “directing that the cause of action should be against the Commissioner of Internal Revenue personally since he is not responsible for the conduct of others claiming to act under his authority”.Page: Previous 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011