143.611. Examination of return. — 1. As soon as practical after the return is filed, the director of revenue shall examine it to determine the correct amount of tax. If the director of revenue finds that the amount of tax shown on the return is less than the correct amount, he shall notify the taxpayer of the amount of the deficiency proposed to be assessed. If the director of revenue finds that the tax paid is more than the correct amount, he shall credit the overpayment against any taxes due under sections 143.011 to 143.996 from the taxpayer and refund the difference. No deficiency shall be proposed and no refund shall be made pursuant to this or any section of sections 143.011 to 143.996 unless the amount exceeds one dollar.
2. If the taxpayer fails to file an income tax return, the director of revenue shall estimate the taxpayer's taxable income and the tax thereon from any available information and notify the taxpayer of the amount proposed to be assessed as in the case of a deficiency.
3. The notice required by subsections 1 and 2 of this section, hereafter referred to as a notice of deficiency, shall set forth the reason for the proposed assessment. The notice of deficiency shall be mailed by certified or registered mail to the taxpayer at his last known address. In the case of a combined return, the notice of deficiency may be a single combined notice except that if the director of revenue is notified by either spouse that separate residences have been established he shall mail notices to each spouse. If the taxpayer is deceased, is under a legal disability, or, in the case of a corporation, has terminated its existence, a notice of deficiency may be mailed to his last known address unless the director of revenue has received notice of the existence and address of a person to receive notices with respect to such taxpayer.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
11
cases, 1983–2015 · leading case:
Schlereth v. Hardy, 280 S.W.3d 47 (Mo. 2009).
Schlereth v. Hardy, 280 S.W.3d 47 (Mo. 2009).
· cites it 2× “Section 143.611. The state has an interest in the economical and expeditious determination of tax liability that justifies the notice in Elliott .”
State v. Elliott, 225 S.W.3d 423 (Mo. 2007).
· cites it 4× “Pursuant to section 143.611 2 notices were sent by certified mail to Elliott’s address as indicated on the federal returns.”
State Ex Rel. Fischer v. Brooks, 150 S.W.3d 284 (Mo. 2004).
· cites it 6× “The Director of Revenue sues pursuant to section 143.611, RSMo, to collect state income taxes for the years 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996.”
State v. Crow, 63 S.W.3d 270 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 3× “He argues that he had no opportunity to protest his tax liability because the Director of Revenue failed to follow § 143.611, RSMo 1994 by notifying him of his deficiency.”
Matteson v. Dir. of Revenue, 909 S.W.2d 356 (Mo. 1995).
· cites it 3× “Nichols does not apply because it involved a notice of deficiency proceeding under section 143.611, RSMo 1986. 2 Section 143.”
New Garden Restaurant, Inc. v. Dir. of Revenue, 471 S.W.3d 314 (Mo. 2015).
“In Elliott , the director sent notices of tax assessments by certified mail to the taxpayer’s last known address, pursuant to § 143.611’s requirements. 4 Id. The notices were returned to the Director as unclaimed, and the taxpayer, like New Garden, claimed a due process…”
Neeter v. Dir. of Revenue (In Re Neeter), 287 B.R. 449 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 2001).
· cites it 2× “The director of revenue may, at any time within the period prescribed for assessment, make a supplemental assessment, subject to the provisions of section 143.611 where applicable, whenever it is found that any assessment is imperfect or incomplete in any material aspect.”
Suburban Newspapers of Greater St. Louis, Inc. v. Dir. of Revenue, 975 S.W.2d 107 (Mo. 1998).
“of Missouri consolidated returns by the affiliated group does not clearly reflect the Missouri taxable income derived from sources within Missouri and for the purpose of preventing avoidance of Missouri tax liability, may terminate the right of an affiliated group to continue…”
Lucent Tech., Inc. v. Dir. of Revenue, 123 S.W.3d 290 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).
“The pleading requirements and the Commission's role differ in deficiency proceedings under § 143.611 because that statute merely requires the director of revenue to "notify the taxpayer of the amount of deficiency proposed to be assessed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.