- 32 -
the filing of the bankruptcy petition. In my view, a discharge
in bankruptcy of a tax debt does not vitiate the existence or the
amount of that debt. Rather, the discharge discharges the
individual debtor from paying the tax debt that exists.
The question might be asked, if the Bankruptcy Court should
have expressly determined that a taxpayer was discharged from a
tax debt, whether we would be at liberty to reach a different
result, and vice versa. Judge Vasquez answered that question for
the Court in Katz v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 329, 340 (2000). In
Katz, the Court held, because the Bankruptcy Court had considered
and rejected the taxpayer’s claim that he was discharged from a
tax liability for the year in question, we would not address that
question. That was the correct result under the rule of res
judicata or claim preclusion. Similarly, if the Tax Court were
to hold that a taxpayer was or was not discharged from a particu-
lar tax debt, the Bankruptcy Court would be bound by our holding.
See Erspan v. Badgett, 647 F.2d 550, 556 (5th Cir. 1981). In
this connection, Rule 4007(a) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy
Procedure provides that either a debtor or a creditor may file a
complaint in the Bankruptcy Court to obtain a determination
whether a debtor was discharged from a particular debt. However,
the Bankruptcy Court’s jurisdiction to resolve
the dischargeability issue involving most debts, including tax
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011