1. Under R.S. § 3226, as amended, a suit against the United
States to recover an internal revenue tax will not lie if not
commenced within five years after payment of the tax or within two
years after disallowance by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue of
the taxpayer's claim for refund. P.
282 U. S.
658.
2. Notwithstanding the provision of this statute directing the
Commissioner within 90 day after any disallowance to notify the
taxpayer thereof by mail, the two-year limitation on suit begins on
disallowance, and not on the giving of notice by the Commissioner.
P.
282 U. S.
658.
3. Suit may not be maintained against the United States in any
case not clearly within the terms of the statute by which it
consents to be sued. P.
282 U. S.
659.
37 F.2d 38 reversed.
Page 282 U. S. 656
Certiorari, 281 U.S. 714, to review two reversals of judgments
dismissing the complaints in suits to recover money collected as
taxes.
MR. JUSTICE BUTLER delivered the opinion of the Court.
These actions were brought in the District Court for the
Southern District of New York. Each respondent sued to recover
income taxes incorrectly determined for 1919 and paid in 1920. On
defendant's motion in the nature of a general demurrer, that court
dismissed. The circuit court of appeals reversed. 37 F.2d 38.
The sole question is whether the actions were commenced within
the time allowed by R.S. § 3226, as amended. 26 U.S.C., §
156.
In 1924, Michel on February 7, and Krieger on September 15,
filed a claim for refund. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue, by
a letter dated August 17, 1925, advised Michel that his claim would
be rejected and that the rejection would officially appear on the
next schedule to be approved by him. The claim was rejected
September 2. The Commissioner, April 2, 1925, sent a like letter to
Krieger, and his claim was rejected April 20. The Commissioner did
not give notice to either of them that his claim had been
disallowed or of the date of disallowance until June 27, 1928. The
suits were subsequently brought more than two years after the
rejections and less than two years after the notices.
Page 282 U. S. 658
Section 3226 as amended provides:
"No suit or proceeding shall be maintained in any court for the
recovery of any internal revenue tax alleged to have been
erroneously or illegally assessed or collected . . . until a claim
for refund of credit has been duly filed with the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue. . . . No such suit or proceeding shall be begun
before the expiration of six months from the date of filing such
claim unless the commissioner renders a decision thereon within
that time, nor after the expiration of five years from the date of
the payment of such tax . . . unless such suit or proceeding is
begun within two years after the disallowance of the part of such
claim to which such suit or proceeding relates. The commissioner
shall within 90 days after any such disallowance notify the
taxpayer thereof by mail."
By the statute, the United States waived its sovereign immunity
from suit. The permission to sue is conditioned on the filing of a
claim and the lapse of six months or the disallowance of the claim
within that period, and is limited to not more than five years
after payment of the tax, unless the claim has been disallowed and
the action is commenced within two years from the disallowance.
Neither of these claims was rejected within six months after
filing. And in each case more than two years elapsed after
rejection before the Commissioner sent notice that the claim had
been disallowed. Neither action was commenced within five years
after payment of the tax or within two years after disallowance of
the claim. The taxpayers contend, and the circuit court of appeals
held, that the permission to sue continues for two years after
notice that the claims had been disallowed, and that therefore
these actions were commenced within time.
As the Commissioner did not act within six months, permission to
sue did not depend upon the rejection of
Page 282 U. S. 659
the claim or upon the giving of the notice. By the terms of the
statute, the period within which the government consented to be
sued commenced at the expiration of such six months, and continued
uninterruptedly through the five-year period following the date of
payment and until "two years after the disallowance." While the
statute declares that the Commissioner within a specified time
shall notify the taxpayer that his claim has been disallowed, it is
nowhere stated that the Commissioner's failure to give the notice
will, in any event, operate to extend the time for bringing suit.
An implication to that effect cannot prevail against the rule
expressly stated. It is clear that, where the Commissioner renders
no decision within six months, the section contemplates that,
before commencing his suit, the taxpayer will ascertain by inquiry
whether the Commissioner has acted. This at least suggests that it
may be the intention of the act to leave a like burden upon
claimants in all cases.
Provisions in tax laws limiting the time within which the United
States may enforce the payment of taxes by distraint or suit are to
be interpreted liberally in favor of the taxpayers.
Bowers v.
N.Y. & Albany Co., 273 U. S. 346;
United States v. Updike, 281 U. S. 489. But
it is also well established that suit may not be maintained against
the United States in any case not clearly within the terms of the
statute by which it consents to be sued.
Eastern Transp. Co. v.
United States, 272 U. S. 675,
272 U. S. 686;
Price v. United States and Osage Indians, 174 U.
S. 373,
174 U. S.
375-376. There is nothing in the legislative history of
the provision to indicate an intention that the two-year period
should not commence upon the disallowance of the claim, or that it
should be extended by the failure of the Commissioner to give the
specified notice.
*
Page 282 U. S. 660
Having regard to the rule of strict construction to be applied
to waivers by the United States of its sovereign immunity from
suit, the clause reasonably may be read merely as a direction to
the Commissioner to send the notice to claimant without making the
failure so to do have the effect of enlarging the period for suing
as otherwise definitely prescribed.
The permission to each of the plaintiffs to bring suit expired
two years after his claim was disallowed.
Judgment reversed.
* Senate Report No. 1137, 67th Congress, 4th Session, p. 5.
House Report No. 1757, 67th Congress, 4th Session, p. 3.