87‑0298
Income
Signed
10/1/87
BEFORE THE STATE TAX
COMMISSION OF UTAH
_____________________________________
XXXXX
Petitioner, ) INFORMAL
DECISION
v. )
COLLECTION
DIVISION OF THE )
STATE TAX
COMMISSION OF UTAH, )
Respondent. ) Appeal No.
87-0298
) Acct. No. XXXXX
_____________________________________
STATEMENT OF
CASE
An Informal Hearing was held on
XXXXX. XXXXX represented himself. James E. Harward, Hearing Officer, heard the
matter for the Utah State Tax Commission.
Petitioner requests a waiver of the penalty and interest assessed
against a deficiency in tax paid for the tax year XXXXX. Petitioner testified
that in XXXXX he was going through a divorce and that he and his wife were
still filing joint returns that year.
Petitioner said that his wife paid the federal tax obligation for XXXXX
and that he thought she paid the state tax obligation. Petitioner owed a total of $$$$$ in XXXXX,
and $$$$$ had been withheld during the year.
Petitioner consequently owed a balance of $$$$$ which apparently was
never paid. Petitioner testified that
he first learned of the deficiency for the XXXXX tax year in XXXXX. He said that he received a notice on XXXXX,
and that he paid the balance due on XXXXX.
Petitioner believes that it is extremely unfair for the Tax Commission
not to have notified him that there was an additional tax owing for just under
five years while continuing to accrue interest. Petitioner asserted that he files and pays his tax obligations
promptly. This statement is borne out
by Respondent's filing records which indicate that after XXXXX, Petitioner has
never filed nor paid his state tax obligation late. Petitioner feels that the penalty and interest on his XXXXX tax
obligation exist because of Tax Commission inaction and not as a result of his
inaction. Respondent's filing records
show that on XXXXX, a notice of deficiency was sent to Petitioner. The records do not show whether the notice
was sent to Petitioner or Petitioner's wife.
The records also show that on XXXXX, a warrant letter was sent and on
XXXXX, a warrant was issued. On XXXXX,
the Tax Commission received a docket return on the warrant. A $$$$$ refund for the tax year XXXXX was
applied to the XXXXX deficiency.
Following the XXXXX refund application, no action was taken on the XXXXX
deficiency until XXXXX, when the Tax Commission sent Petitioner another notice
that there was a deficiency amount owing for XXXXX. As Petitioner indicated, Petitioner immediately paid the balance
of the amount of the tax still owing ($$$$$).
Utah Code Ann. 59‑14A‑86
(Supp. 1986) (new Section 59‑10‑536) entitled Limitations on
Assessment and Collection, states that the amount of tax imposed by the
individual income tax act of XXXXX shall be assessed within three years after
the date the return was filed. The
return was filed on XXXXX and the notice of deficiency was issued on
XXXXX. Respondent timely made the
assessment. Respondent had three years
after the assessment in which to file a warrant. The assessment was made on XXXXX. The warrant was filed on XXXXX.
Respondent timely filed the warrant. Section 59‑14A‑79(e)
(New Section 59‑10‑528(5)) provides that when a warrant has been
filed with the county clerk, the Tax Commission shall be deemed to have
obtained judgment against the taxpayer for the tax or other amounts. Utah Code Ann. 78‑12‑22 provides for an eight year statute of
limitation for an action upon a judgment of any state within the United
States. Under tax law, the filing of
the warrant for taxes with the county clerk is deemed to be a judgment against
the taxpayer by the State. The Tax
Commission did not exceed its statutes of limitation for collecting the
tax. First, the Tax Commission, within
one year from the time the return was filed, filed a warrant with the county
clerk which has the effect of obtaining a judgment against Petitioner. Then,
within eight years of the time judgment was obtained against Petitioner, the
Tax Commission has attempted to collect on the judgment. The Commission declines to waive the penalty
or interest assessed against Petitioner.
However, interest is ordered to be abated as of XXXXX, the date
Petitioner paid the balance of the tax owing to the State of Utah.
DECISION AND
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is the
Decision and Order of the Utah State Tax Commission to deny Petitioner's
Request. However, Respondent is ordered
to abate the interest accruing against Petitioner as of XXXXX. Petitioner's
filing history indicates that the amount of interest which had accrued through
XXXXX, would be $$$$$.
DATED this 1 Day of October, 1987.
BY ORDER OF THE
STATE TAX COMMISSION OF UTAH.
R. H. Hansen Roger O. Tew
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B. Pacheco G. Blaine Davis
Commissioner Commissioner
NOTICE: You
have 30 days after the date on the Mailing Certificate to request a Formal
Hearing.
^^