26 U.S.C. § 1399
No separate taxable entities for partnerships, corporations, etc.
Except in any case to which section 1398 applies, no separate taxable entity shall result from the commencement of a case under title 11 of the United States Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases, 1995–2019 · leading case: Knudsen v. Internal Revenue Serv., 581 F.3d 696 (8th Cir. 2009).
Knudsen v. Internal Revenue Serv., 581 F.3d 696 (8th Cir. 2009). “§ 1398 with 26 U.S.C. § 1399 . Additionally, even though there is no "separate taxable entity" in a Chapter 12 case, an "estate" still exists, pursuant to 11 U.”
Callahan v. UMWA 1992 Plan (In Re Callahan), 304 B.R. 743 (Bankr. W.D. Va. 2004). “, (hereinafter, “Callahan”), contends that the Bankruptcy Court erred in holding that 26 U.S.C. § 1399 mandates the conclusion that the Chapter 7 bankruptcy estate of a debtor corporation is one and the same as the debtor itself.”
United States v. Dawes (In Re Dawes), 652 F.3d 1236 (10th Cir. 2011). “There’s no escaping that those are “taxes incurred by the estate”— the estate is obligated by federal law to pay them. But in Chapter 12 and 13 bankruptcies, the debtor — not the bankruptcy estate — bears the sole responsibility for filing and paying post-petition federal income…”
United States v. Hall, 617 F.3d 1161 (9th Cir. 2010). “Title 26 U.S.C. § 1399 states that "no separate taxable entity shall result from the commencement of a case under title 11 of the United States Code"the bankruptcy title"[e]xcept in any case to which section 1398 applies.”
In Re Knudsen, 389 B.R. 643 (N.D. Iowa 2008). “§ 346 (c) and 26 U.S.C. § 1399 , which “dictate] that the bankruptcy estate of the corporate debtor [in a Chapter 11 case] is not a separate taxable entity.”
In Re Whall, 391 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2008). “See 26 U.S.C. § 1399 . 16 . Brown, 2006 WL 3370867 *3.”
In Re Dow Corning Corp., 270 B.R. 393 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2001). “”) with 26 U.S.C. § 1399 ("Except in any case to which [26 U.”
In Re Hall, 376 B.R. 741 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2007). “The state’s argument pertaining to postpetition taxes was that when income taxes straddle the petition date, the tax claim cannot be split into prepetition and postpetition portions because that splits the tax year between the prepetition corporation and the postpe-tition…”
In Re Knudsen, 356 B.R. 480 (Bankr. D. Iowa 2006). “26 U.S.C. §§ 1399 , 1398(a); see also 26 U.”
In Re Dawes, 382 B.R. 509 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2008). “26U.S.C. § 1399. 28 . 11 U.S.C. §§ 541 and 1207.”
Hansen, Jones & Leta, P.C. v. Segal, 220 B.R. 434 (D. Utah 1998). “26 U.S.C. § 1399 . Under tax law, the corporation is the same taxable entity, only now in bankruptcy.”
In Re Braude Jewelry Corp., 333 B.R. 156 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2005). “According to 26 U.S.C. § 1399 , “Except in any case to which section 1398 applies, no separate taxable entity shall result from the commencement of a case under title 11 of the United States Code.”
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.