- 28 -
action for damages pursuant to section 7433. For the reasons
discussed below, we disagree.
Section 7433(a) provides that (except as provided in section
7432) a civil action brought by a taxpayer against the United
States “shall be the exclusive remedy for recovering damages
resulting from” unauthorized collection actions. (Emphasis
added.) Respondent apparently would have us read the underscored
language out of the statute. Fundamental principles of statutory
construction preclude us from reading the statute in such a way
as to render statutory language mere surplusage. See, e.g.,
United States v. Campos-Serrano, 404 U.S. 293, 301 (1971).
Moreover, incongruities between the mandate of section
6335(f) and the scope of the section 7433 cause of action for
damages suggest that section 7433 was not intended to occupy or
encroach upon the field of available judicial remedies for
respondent’s violation of section 6335(f). Most notably, section
7433 predicates a cause of action for damages on culpable conduct
by the Commissioner’s officers or employees; i.e., negligent,
reckless, or intentional disregard of statutory or regulatory
provisions. The statutory mandate of section 6335(f), on the
other hand, does not turn on culpability or the lack thereof. A
violation of section 6335(f) (arising, for example, from a legal
misunderstanding by respondent’s employees) is no less a
violation because it is not negligent, reckless, or intentional;
yet, under respondent’s view (which we cannot characterize as
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011