26 U.S.C. § 6215

Assessment of deficiency found by Tax Court

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 26 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General rule

If the taxpayer files a petition with the Tax Court, the entire amount redetermined as the deficiency by the decision of the Tax Court which has become final shall be assessed and shall be paid upon notice and demand from the Secretary. No part of the amount determined as a deficiency by the Secretary but disallowed as such by the decision of the Tax Court which has become final shall be assessed or be collected by levy or by proceeding in court with or without assessment.

(b) Cross references(1) For assessment or collection of the amount of the deficiency determined by the Tax Court pending appellate court review, see section 7485.(2) For dismissal of petition by Tax Court as affirmation of deficiency as determined by the Secretary, see section 7459(d).(3) For decision of Tax Court that tax is barred by limitation as its decision that there is no deficiency, see section 7459(e).(4) For assessment of damages awarded by Tax Court for instituting proceedings merely for delay, see section 6673.(5) For rules applicable to Tax Court proceedings, see generally subchapter C of chapter 76.(6) For extension of time for paying amount determined as deficiency, see section 6161(b).(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 773; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, § 1906(a)(16), (b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1825, 1834; Pub. L. 99–514, title XIV, § 1404(c)(2), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2714; Pub. L. 115–141, div. U, title IV, § 401(b)(46), Mar. 23, 2018, 132 Stat. 1204.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2018—Subsec. (b)(5) to (7). Pub. L. 115–141 redesignated pars. (6) and (7) as (5) and (6), respectively, and struck out former par. (5) which read as follows: “For treatment of certain deficiencies as having been paid, in connection with sale of surplus war-built vessels, see section 9(b)(8) of the Merchant Ship Sales Act of 1946 (50 U.S.C. App. 1742).”

1986—Subsec. (b)(7), (8). Pub. L. 99–514 redesignated par. (8) as (7) and struck out former par. (7) which read as follows: “For proration of deficiency to installments, see section 6152(c).”

1976—Pub. L. 94–455, § 1906(b)(13)(A), struck out “or his delegate” after “Secretary” wherever appearing.

Subsec. (b)(5). Pub. L. 94–455, § 1906(a)(16), struck out “60 Stat. 48;” before “50 U.S.C. App. 1742”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1986 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–514 applicable to taxable years beginning after Dec. 31, 1986, see section 1404(d) of Pub. L. 99–514, set out as a note under section 643 of this title.

Savings Provision

For provisions that nothing in amendment by Pub. L. 115–141 be construed to affect treatment of certain transactions occurring, property acquired, or items of income, loss, deduction, or credit taken into account prior to Mar. 23, 2018, for purposes of determining liability for tax for periods ending after Mar. 23, 2018, see section 401(e) of Pub. L. 115–141, set out as a note under section 23 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1967–2025 · leading case: Khan v. BDO Seidman, LLP, 948 N.E.2d 132 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Khan v. BDO Seidman, LLP, 948 N.E.2d 132 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “See 26 U.S.C. §6215 (a) (2006). Or, worse yet, if the taxpayer first wins a judgment against the accountant and subsequently the IRS never assesses the taxpayer with a deficiency, the damages the taxpayer won from the accountant would be an unjust windfall, putting our judicial…”

Stephanatos v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 440 (Fed. Cl. 2008). “’’ 26 U.S.C. § 6215 (a) (2008) (emphasis added).”

Lawrence H. Melin, Jr. & Sandra S. Melin v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 54 F.3d 432 (7th Cir. 1995). “26 U.S.C. § 6215 . Our answer, like our sister circuits, is no.”

United States v. Mosolowitz, 269 F. Supp. 12 (D. Conn. 1967). “The taxpayer being the sole owner of this Vernon Street property, it is undisputed that the government is entitled to enforce its federal tax lien against this property and that the property may be sold in satisfaction of such lien.”

United States v. Major, 551 B.R. 531 (M.D. Fla. 2016). “” 26 U.S.C. § 6215 . Here, it is undisputed that the United States Tax Court entered a stipulated decision regarding Major’s federal income tax deficiencies on April Í5, 2010.”

Stand. Insurances v. IRS (10th Cir. 2025). · cites it 2× “See 26 U.S.C. § 6215 (a). These cases remain pending.”

Ralph G. Evans v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue (11th Cir. 2022). “See 26 U.S.C. § 6215 (a). And although the petitioners correctly suggest that the penalties issue could become moot if they eventually prevail on their underlying challenges, the mere prospect that an issue might be mooted at some future time does not place the issue beyond our…”

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.