- 9 -
this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
decided Omohundro v. United States, 300 F.3d 1065 (9th Cir.
2002), in which the court announced that “we are no longer bound
by Miller. Accordingly, we hold that under I.R.C. sec. 6511(a),
a taxpayer’s claim for credit or a refund is timely if it is
filed within three years from the date his income tax return is
filed, regardless of when the return is filed.” Id. at 1069.
In Miller, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had
held that a taxpayer must file a return within 2 years of payment
of the taxes to recover a refund or credit; otherwise, no claim
could ever be finally barred by the 2-year-after-payment clause
of section 6511(a). Also, the court stated in Omohundro that its
construction of section 6511(a) in Miller was necessary to
prevent forum shopping under a version of section 6512(b)(3) no
longer in effect.
In Omohundro v. United States, supra, the court further
stated that “In deciding Miller, we did not consider Revenue
Ruling 76-511 which was directly on point and in effect at the
time.” Id. at 1067.
After Miller v. United States, supra, was decided in 1994,
the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Mead Corp., 533
U.S. 218 (2001), intervened. The court in Omohundro observed:
In United States v. Mead Corp., the Supreme Court
held that an administrative agency’s interpretation of
a statute contained in an informal rulemaking must be
accorded the level of deference set forth in Skidmore
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011