United States v. Habig
United States Supreme Court
390 U.S. 222, 88 S. Ct. 926, 19 L. Ed. 2d 1055 (1968)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
The deadline for certain corporations to file their tax returns was May 15, 1951, but the corporations obtained extensions until August 15. The corporations filed the returns on August 12 and August 15. Arnold Habig and Jerome Schroering (defendants) were responsible for the preparation and filing of the corporate returns. On August 12, 1966, Habig and Schroering were indicted for, among other things, filing a false tax return and aiding in the preparation and presentation of a false return in violation of Internal Revenue Code (code) §§ 7206(a) and (b), respectively. The district court dismissed the §§ 7206(a) and (b) charges as time-barred. Specifically, the district court ruled that the six-year statute of limitations set forth in code § 6531 commenced in May 1960, when the returns were due, and not on August 12 and 15, when the returns were filed in accordance with the extensions. The district court based this conclusion on code § 6513(a), which was entitled “Early Return or Advance Payment of Tax,” and which stated that (1) a return filed before its deadline was deemed filed on the deadline and (2) for the purposes of § 6513(a), the filing deadline was determined without regard to any extension granted to the taxpayer. The United States appealed, arguing that the limitations period did not begin to run until the corporations filed the returns.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fortas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.