Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

charset="ISO-8859-1"
Sorry for the confusion. If no extension is requested, you use the general
due date for the return. Use 10/15 (or later) only if an extension is
requested, because otherwise the return is due 4/15.
- John D. Faucher
On 8/3/10 9:03 AM, "jbsesq1965" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> John, your post only confuses me! In my case, the taxpayer TIMELY filed his
> 2007 returns, for certain (before April 15, 2008). No extension was requested
> or "automatically" given. I thought I read at least one post here some time
> ago that argued that the extension (Octber 15) applies ANYWAY, so that
> dischargeability won't come until 10/15/11.
>
> Your statement that:
> "In answer to the original question, the statute's language seems to require
> 10/15 as the start date for the 3-year clock, but if no extension is filed,
> its actually calculated from 4/15..."
>
> is EXACTLY my concern in a case that involves hundreds of thousands of
> dollars. I agree that the statute CAN be interpreted to include the extension
> even if none was required/requested/given or needed. The question is does
> anyone know if that position has been taken by the IRS or State, or if any
> case has interpreted it that way. I can't afford to get this one wrong, and
> the client is not happy with the advice of "just wait until next October to be
> safe".
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jeff Smith
>
>
>
>
>
>>> - John D. Faucher
charset="ISO-8859-1"
Re: [cdcbaa] Re: TAXES Three Year Rule and Extension
Sorry for the confusion. If no extension is requested, you use the general due date for the return. Use 10/15 (or later) only if an extension is requested, because otherwise the return is due 4/15.
- John D. Faucher
On 8/3/10 9:03 AM, "jbsesq1965" <jsmith@cgsattys.com> wrote:



John, your post only confuses me! In my case, the taxpayer TIMELY filed his 2007 returns, for certain (before April 15, 2008). No extension was requested or "automatically" given. I thought I read at least one post here some time ago that argued that the extension (Octber 15) applies ANYWAY, so that dischargeability won't come until 10/15/11.
Your statement that:
"In answer to the original question, the statute's language seems to require
10/15 as the start date for the 3-year clock, but if no extension is filed,
it’s actually calculated from 4/15..."
is EXACTLY my concern in a case that involves hundreds of thousands of dollars. I agree that the statute CAN be interpreted to include the extension even if none was required/requested/given or needed. The question is does anyone know if that position has been taken by the IRS or State, or if any case has interpreted it that way. I can't afford to get this one wrong, and the client is not happy with the advice of "just wait until next October to be safe".
Thanks.
Jeff Smith


- John D. Faucher

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I lost the original post on this, but if the return was filed by
4/15/08 then the 3 year period will run by 4/15/11, assuming no
intervening bankruptcy cases filed during that period. This does
not affect the other required time periods. If your client is
really concerned, have him pay an expert such as Morgan King to analyze.
*************************
Mark J. Markus
Law Office of Mark J. Markus
11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
Studio City, CA 91604-2652
(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this means at http://bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/2008/0 ... efinition/)
________________________________________________
NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication.
On 8/3/2010 9:03 AM, jbsesq1965 wrote:
> John, your post only confuses me! In my case, the taxpayer TIMELY filed his 2007 returns, for certain (before April 15, 2008). No extension was requested or "automatically" given. I thought I read at least one post here some time ago that argued that the extension (Octber 15) applies ANYWAY, so that dischargeability won't come until 10/15/11.
>
> Your statement that:
> "In answer to the original question, the statute's language seems to require
> 10/15 as the start date for the 3-year clock, but if no extension is filed,
> its actually calculated from 4/15..."
>
> is EXACTLY my concern in a case that involves hundreds of thousands of dollars. I agree that the statute CAN be interpreted to include the extension even if none was required/requested/given or needed. The question is does anyone know if that position has been taken by the IRS or State, or if any case has interpreted it that way. I can't afford to get this one wrong, and the client is not happy with the advice of "just wait until next October to be safe".
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jeff Smith
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

John, your post only confuses me! In my case, the taxpayer TIMELY filed his 2007 returns, for certain (before April 15, 2008). No extension was requested or "automatically" given. I thought I read at least one post here some time ago that argued that the extension (Octber 15) applies ANYWAY, so that dischargeability won't come until 10/15/11.
Your statement that:
"In answer to the original question, the statute's language seems to require
10/15 as the start date for the 3-year clock, but if no extension is filed,
its actually calculated from 4/15..."
is EXACTLY my concern in a case that involves hundreds of thousands of dollars. I agree that the statute CAN be interpreted to include the extension even if none was required/requested/given or needed. The question is does anyone know if that position has been taken by the IRS or State, or if any case has interpreted it that way. I can't afford to get this one wrong, and the client is not happy with the advice of "just wait until next October to be safe".
Thanks.
Jeff Smith

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

charset="ISO-8859-1"
Roger that. IRS attorneys cant stipulate to dischargeability of tax (in
the context of declaratory judgments in adversary proceedings re
dischargeability of taxes) unless a revenue officer has reviewed it and had
his manager sign off on the memo.
In answer to the original question, the statutes language seems to require
10/15 as the start date for the 3-year clock, but if no extension is filed,
its actually calculated from 4/15 (this is shorthand for the actual filing
date for that year).
- John D. Faucher
On 8/2/10 3:05 PM, "Dennis" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Btw so far as I know, the IRS always checks the transcript for extensions to
> calc 3 year rule
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 29, 2010, at 4:32 PM, "jbsesq1965" wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> OK. I read a post a few weeks back and took only limited notice of it at the
>> time, but now I am REALLY interested. I cannot find the post. Actually I'm
>> too busy (lazy) to look through 500 posts to find the needle in the haystack.
>>
>> The argument was made (I think) that for taxes to be discharged you must
>> wait, not only three years from the date the tax return is last due (April
>> 15), but also through the extension period (October 15), WHETHER THE
>> EXTENSION WAS REQUESTED OR NOT. The argument was made based on the language
>> of 507(a)(8)(A)(i) and on close examination I see the argument.
>>
>> Still, in 20 years I've never heard of a taxing authority taking that
>> position. That is, my PC filed his 2007 TR BEFORE April 15, 2008. I have
>> opined that the liability will be dischargeable on April 16, 2011. There are
>> no other issues related to these taxes.
>>
>> Am I to understand that some in our group take the position that these taxes
>> are not dischargeable until OCTOBER 15, 2011? I find no cases that interpret
>> 507(a)(8)(A)(i) that way, and I have never heard of a taxing authority taking
>> this position. Still, the number here is big, a couple of hundred grand in
>> taxes at least, and I cannot leave this to chance.
>>
>> Whomever out there thinks that the date is Octber no matter what, please let
>> me know if there is authority for that or any specific instances of a taxing
>> agency taking that position.
>>
>> Thanks. Jeff Smith
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>> - John D. Faucher
charset="ISO-8859-1"
Re: [cdcbaa] TAXES Three Year Rule and Extension
Roger that. IRS attorneys can’t stipulate to dischargeability of tax (in the context of declaratory judgments in adversary proceedings re dischargeability of taxes) unless a revenue officer has reviewed it and had his manager sign off on the memo.
In answer to the original question, the statute’s language seems to require 10/15 as the start date for the 3-year clock, but if no extension is filed, it’s actually calculated from 4/15 (this is shorthand for the actual filing date for that year).
- John D. Faucher
On 8/2/10 3:05 PM, "Dennis" <easky1@yahoo.com> wrote:



Btw so far as I know, the IRS always checks the transcript for extensions to calc 3 year rule
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 29, 2010, at 4:32 PM, "jbsesq1965" <jsmith@cgsattys.com> wrote:


OK. I read a post a few weeks back and took only limited notice of it at the time, but now I am REALLY interested. I cannot find the post. Actually I'm too busy (lazy) to look through 500 posts to find the needle in the haystack.
The argument was made (I think) that for taxes to be discharged you must wait, not only three years from the date the tax return is last due (April 15), but also through the extension period (October 15), WHETHER THE EXTENSION WAS REQUESTED OR NOT. The argument was made based on the language of 507(a)(8)(A)(i) and on close examination I see the argument.
Still, in 20 years I've never heard of a taxing authority taking that position. That is, my PC filed his 2007 TR BEFORE April 15, 2008. I have opined that the liability will be dischargeable on April 16, 2011. There are no other issues related to these taxes.
Am I to understand that some in our group take the position that these taxes are not dischargeable until OCTOBER 15, 2011? I find no cases that interpret 507(a)(8)(A)(i) that way, and I have never heard of a taxing authority taking this position. Still, the number here is big, a couple of hundred grand in taxes at least, and I cannot leave this to chance.
Whomever out there thinks that the date is Octber no matter what, please let me know if there is authority for that or any specific instances of a taxing agency taking that position.
Thanks. Jeff Smith





- John D. Faucher

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Btw so far as I know, the IRS always checks the transcript for extensions to calc 3 year rule
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 29, 2010, at 4:32 PM, "jbsesq1965" wrote:
OK. I read a post a few weeks back and took only limited notice of it at the time, but now I am REALLY interested. I cannot find the post. Actually I'm too busy (lazy) to look through 500 posts to find the needle in the haystack.
The argument was made (I think) that for taxes to be discharged you must wait, not only three years from the date the tax return is last due (April 15), but also through the extension period (October 15), WHETHER THE EXTENSION WAS REQUESTED OR NOT. The argument was made based on the language of 507(a)(8)(A)(i) and on close examination I see the argument.
Still, in 20 years I've never heard of a taxing authority taking that position. That is, my PC filed his 2007 TR BEFORE April 15, 2008. I have opined that the liability will be dischargeable on April 16, 2011. There are no other issues related to these taxes.
Am I to understand that some in our group take the position that these taxes are not dischargeable until OCTOBER 15, 2011? I find no cases that interpret 507(a)(8)(A)(i) that way, and I have never heard of a taxing authority taking this position. Still, the number here is big, a couple of hundred grand in taxes at least, and I cannot leave this to chance.
Whomever out there thinks that the date is Octber no matter what, please let me know if there is authority for that or any specific instances of a taxing agency taking that position.
Thanks. Jeff Smith
Btw so far as I know, the IRS always checks the transcript for extensions to calc 3 year ruleSent from my iPhoneOn Jul 29, 2010, at 4:32 PM, "jbsesq1965" <

OK. I read a post a few weeks back and took only limited notice of it at the time, but now I am REALLY interested. I cannot find the post. Actually I'm too busy (lazy) to look through 500 posts to find the needle in the haystack.
The argument was made (I think) that for taxes to be discharged you must wait, not only three years from the date the tax return is last due (April 15), but also through the extension period (October 15), WHETHER THE EXTENSION WAS REQUESTED OR NOT. The argument was made based on the language of 507(a)(8)(A)(i) and on close examination I see the argument.
Still, in 20 years I've never heard of a taxing authority taking that position. That is, my PC filed his 2007 TR BEFORE April 15, 2008. I have opined that the liability will be dischargeable on April 16, 2011. There are no other issues related to these taxes.
Am I to understand that some in our group take the position that these taxes are not dischargeable until OCTOBER 15, 2011? I find no cases that interpret 507(a)(8)(A)(i) that way, and I have never heard of a taxing authority taking this position. Still, the number here is big, a couple of hundred grand in taxes at least, and I cannot leave this to chance.
Whomever out there thinks that the date is Octber no matter what, please let me know if there is authority for that or any specific instances of a taxing agency taking that position.
Thanks. Jeff Smith

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

First due includes extensions. If no extension, apr 16, but, wait, 4/15 was a Sunday, taxes then due 16th, so wait until 4/17/11. Jim is right, make sure State taxes were also filed timely.
D
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 30, 2010, at 10:27 AM, "James T. King" wrote:
Jeff: I think when the state is involved you need to be concerned because there is something about an automatic extension even if not applied for by the taxpayer. 4-15-2011 if filed timely.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Jeff: I think when the state is involved you need to be concerned because there is something about an automatic extension even if not applied for by the taxpayer. 4-15-2011 if filed timely.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

OK. I read a post a few weeks back and took only limited notice of it at the time, but now I am REALLY interested. I cannot find the post. Actually I'm too busy (lazy) to look through 500 posts to find the needle in the haystack.
The argument was made (I think) that for taxes to be discharged you must wait, not only three years from the date the tax return is last due (April 15), but also through the extension period (October 15), WHETHER THE EXTENSION WAS REQUESTED OR NOT. The argument was made based on the language of 507(a)(8)(A)(i) and on close examination I see the argument.
Still, in 20 years I've never heard of a taxing authority taking that position. That is, my PC filed his 2007 TR BEFORE April 15, 2008. I have opined that the liability will be dischargeable on April 16, 2011. There are no other issues related to these taxes.
Am I to understand that some in our group take the position that these taxes are not dischargeable until OCTOBER 15, 2011? I find no cases that interpret 507(a)(8)(A)(i) that way, and I have never heard of a taxing authority taking this position. Still, the number here is big, a couple of hundred grand in taxes at least, and I cannot leave this to chance.
Whomever out there thinks that the date is Octber no matter what, please let me know if there is authority for that or any specific instances of a taxing agency taking that position.
Thanks. Jeff Smith

The post was migrated from Yahoo.