Skip to main content
Supreme Court· 3/21/1960

Flora v. United States

Citations

  • 362 U.S. 145
  • 80 S. Ct. 630
  • 4 L. Ed. 2d 623
  • 1960 U.S. LEXIS 1961
  • 1 C.B. 660
  • 5 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1046

About this case

Jump to content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1958 United States Supreme Court case

Flora v. United States, 357 U.S. 63 (1958), affirmed on rehearing, 362 U.S. 145 (1960), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a taxpayer generally must pay the full amount of an income tax deficiency assessed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue before he may challenge its correctness by a suit in a federal district court for refund under 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(1).[1] The Supreme Court agreed with the Commissioner of Internal Revenue , stating that the full payment rule requires the entire amount of an asserted deficiency to be paid before a refund suit may be maintained.

Importance

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flora_v._United_States&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: Importance")
]

If the taxpayer chooses to pay less than the deficiency asserted, the taxpayer's only remedies are (A) a deficiency proceeding in the Tax Court [2] or, (B) in a bankruptcy case, a determination under section 505(a) of the US Bankruptcy Code .[3] That rule can be a problem for a taxpayer who lets the 90-day period (following the issuance of a statutory notice of deficiency, during which he may file a Tax Court petition) expire and then cannot fully pay because of insufficient assets.

See also

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flora_v._United_States&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: See also")
]

References

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flora_v._United_States&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: References")
]

  1. ↑ 28 U.S.C.  § 1346(a)(1) .
  2. ↑ See generally 26 U.S.C.  § 6213 .
  3. ↑ See 11 U.S.C.  § 505 .

External links

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flora_v._United_States&action=edit&section=4 "Edit section: External links")
]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flora_v._United_States&oldid=1351330618 "

Categories :

Hidden categories:

Search

Search

Flora v. United States

Add languages Add topic

Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “It is essential to the honor and orderly conduct of the government that its taxes should be promptly paid[.]”
  • a taxpayer’s failure to file a timely refund claim divests the district court of jurisdiction over a refund suit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Warren, Whittaker, Frankfurter, Harlan, Stewart

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

540 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

71 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Flora v. United States

6 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.