Phillips v. Commissioner

Supreme Court of the United States · 1931 · Administrative Law

Administrative LawTax collectionDue processTransferee liabilityRevenue Act of 1926§ 280(a)(1)transferee liabilitysummary proceedings

Facts

In 1919, the Coombe Garment Company distributed all of its assets to its stockholders and dissolved. The Commissioner later assessed deficiency income and profits taxes against the corporation for 1918 and 1919, leaving an unpaid balance of $9,306.36 after partial collection. Phillips had owned one-fourth of the stock and had received $17,139.61 in the liquidation. Under § 280(a)(1), the Commissioner proposed to assess and collect the entire remaining deficiency from Phillips alone, and no notice or collection proceedings were directed at the other transferees.

Issue

Whether § 280(a)(1) constitutionally permits the Commissioner to use summary administrative procedures to assess and collect a dissolved corporation's unpaid taxes from a stockholder-transferee without an initial judicial determination. The case also presented whether the section could apply to transfers made before the 1926 Act, whether state law or a Pennsylvania limitations period barred enforcement, and whether Phillips could be charged with the entire unpaid balance rather than only a pro rata share.

Rule

Congress may authorize summary administrative assessment and collection of an existing transferee liability for unpaid taxes if the transferee has an adequate opportunity for ultimate judicial determination, either through a refund suit after payment or through immediate redetermination before the Board of Tax Appeals with judicial review. Section 280(a)(1) creates a new remedy, not a new substantive liability, and a stockholder who receives assets upon dissolution is severally liable, up to the amount received, for the corporation's unpaid taxes; the United States need not join other transferees or limit collection to a pro rata share. State statutes of limitation do not bind the United States unless Congress so provides, and the limitation periods in § 280 control.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Lakeview Fabrication, a dissolved corporation in Ohio, distributed its remaining assets to several shareholders. The Commissioner later used a federal summary administrative procedure to assess unpaid corporate income taxes against Nora Patel, a former shareholder in Cleveland who had received liquidation assets worth more than the tax debt, and Nora argues the Constitution requires a court to determine her liability before any assessment or collection begins.

How should a court rule on Nora's due process objection?

Explanation. The majority held that Congress may authorize summary administrative assessment and collection of an existing transferee liability for taxes without an initial judicial determination, so long as adequate later judicial review is available. Where only property rights are involved, postponement of judicial inquiry does not deny due process if the opportunity for ultimate judicial determination is adequate.