- 8 - computation for entry of decision because we lack jurisdiction over hospital taxes. According to respondent, applying equitable recoupment in this case “would allow petitioners to slip through a back door to challenge a tax they could not directly petition the Court to review.” Respondent does not dispute the amount by which petitioners contend they overpaid their hospital taxes, nor does respondent dispute that the elements necessary for an equitable recoupment claim are present in this case.5 Neither Menards nor Mr. Menard filed a claim for a refund of the hospital taxes that they overpaid. The period of limitations for filing a refund claim has now expired with respect to both petitioners. We have not yet entered decisions in these cases, and consequently no decision has become final within the meaning of section 7481. Discussion These cases present an issue of first impression regarding the scope of our authority to apply the doctrine of equitable 5Respondent did not raise any specific challenge to Mr. Menard’s computations. Respondent does assert, however, that assuming equitable recoupment is available in this case, petitioner Menard, Inc., erred in computing the amount of its income tax deficiency, after accounting for the offset of hospital tax. We shall discuss this issue in greater detail below.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008