26 U.S.C. § 6663
Imposition of fraud penalty
If any part of any underpayment of tax required to be shown on a return is due to fraud, there shall be added to the tax an amount equal to 75 percent of the portion of the underpayment which is attributable to fraud.
If the Secretary establishes that any portion of an underpayment is attributable to fraud, the entire underpayment shall be treated as attributable to fraud, except with respect to any portion of the underpayment which the taxpayer establishes (by a preponderance of the evidence) is not attributable to fraud.
In the case of a joint return, this section shall not apply with respect to a spouse unless some part of the underpayment is due to the fraud of such spouse.
Section applicable to returns the due date for which (determined without regard to extensions) is after
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 67
cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: In re Wyly, 552 B.R. 338 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2016).
In re Wyly, 552 B.R. 338 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2016). “” 18 The purported purpose of Rubenstein’s opinion is to assist the Court in the evaluation of the Debtors’ reasonable cause defense to their failure to file Forms 3520, 3520-A, and 5471, as well as to assist the Court in its evaluation of the Debtors’ alleged fraudulent intent…”
Richardson v. Comm'r, 509 F.3d 736 (6th Cir. 2007). “The Internal Revenue Code provides that “there shall be added to the tax an amount equal to 75 percent of the portion of [any] underpayment [of tax required] which is attributable to fraud,” 26 U.S.C. § 6663 (a), and that a deficiency from a “false or fraudulent return with the…”
Kawashima v. Holder, 132 S. Ct. 1166 (2012). “To but- tress this argument, the Kawashimas point to a body of law providing that a conviction for tax evasion under §7201 collaterally estops the convicted taxpayer from contesting a civil penalty under 26 U. S. C. §6663 (b) for “underpayment .”
Walter Anderson v. Comm'r of Internal Reven, 698 F.3d 160 (3rd Cir. 2012). “See 26 U.S.C. § 6663 (a). Finally, because the three-year statute of limitations on the assessment of a tax does not apply where a tax return has been filed falsely or fraudulently with the intent of evading tax, 26 U.”
Kevin J. Morse v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue Serv., 419 F.3d 829 (8th Cir. 2005). “Morse appeals the tax court’s 1 decision ordering him to pay tax deficiencies and civil fraud penalties under 26 U.S.C. § 6663 for unreported income during the years 1991 through 1994.”
George MacIel v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 489 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2007). “According to the IRS, Maciel owed more than $300,000 in back taxes for 1990-92 and nearly $250,000 in civil penalties pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6663 . Section 6663 imposes penalties when “any part of any underpayment of tax required to be shown on a return is due to fraud.”
Kosinski v. Comm'r, 541 F.3d 671 (6th Cir. 2008). “See 26 U.S.C. § 6663 (a). In seeking to impose this penalty, the government undertook the burden of proving fraudulent intent by clear and convincing evidence.”
High Desert Relief, Inc. v. United States, 917 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2019). “§ 7701 (a)(11)(B), to establish that the payment was in fact unlawful " for the purposes of this paragraph " (emphasis added)); 26 U.S.C. § 6663 (imposing a civil tax penalty for a taxpayer's underpayment if such underpayment "is due to fraud" which may be established by the…”
United States v. Kenneth P. Kontny & Joann L. Kontny, 238 F.3d 815 (7th Cir. 2001). “We do not know this to be the case, but will assume it is for the sake of argument.”
United States v. Said Rum, 995 F.3d 882 (11th Cir. 2021). “Rum then filed a petition with the Tax Court, challenging the IRS’s civil fraud penalty determination under 26 U.S.C. § 6663 . The Tax Court entered a stipulated order based on a settlement whereby Rum would not be subject to a civil fraud penalty but imposed accuracy-related…”
Charles Y. Choi Jin Yi Choi v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 379 F.3d 638 (9th Cir. 2004). “Choi and his wife Jin Yi Choi, appeal the Tax Court’s determination that they underreported the income from their Arizona grocery store on their 1991 and 1992 federal tax returns and the imposition of a civil fraud penalty under 26 U.S.C. § 6663 . It is undisputed that the Chois…”
Leo Goldman & Pauline Goldman v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 39 F.3d 402 (2d Cir. 1994). “” 26 U.S.C. § 6663 (a)(1). Likewise, section 6653(a)(2) imposes a penalty of an additional fifty percent of the interest payable on the'amount of the underpayment found to be attributable to negligence.”
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.