In any judgment of any court rendered (whether against the United States, a collector or deputy collector of internal revenue, a former collector or deputy collector, or the personal representative in case of death) for any overpayment in respect of any internal-revenue tax, interest shall be allowed at the overpayment rate established under section 6621 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 upon the amount of the overpayment, from the date of the payment or collection thereof to a date preceding the date of the refund check by not more than thirty days, such date to be determined by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. The Commissioner is authorized to tender by check payment of any such judgment, with interest as herein provided, at any time after such judgment becomes final, whether or not a claim for such payment has been duly filed, and such tender shall stop the running of interest, whether or not such refund check is accepted by the judgment creditor.
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co., 553 U.S. 1 (2008).
· cites it 2× “The Court of Federal Claims did not, however, allow the companies to recover interest on the taxes paid under 28 U. S. C. §2411 . That provision requires the Government to pay interest “for any overpayment in respect of any internal-revenue tax,” but the court held that the…”
Bulova Watch Co. v. United States, 365 U.S. 753 (1961).
· cites it 6× “Thereafter, petitioner moved the Court of Claims for relief from the Commissioner's interpretation of the judgment, contending that interest should be computed, under the provisions of 28 U. S. C. § 2411 (a), from the earliest date the overpayment could have been determined (the…”
Andalex Resources, Inc. v. United States, 54 Fed. Cl. 563 (Fed. Cl. 2002).
· cites it 12× “By choosing this avenue, they can recover six years of tax overpayments instead of the three years that would have been permitted according to the administrative process of the tax code.”
United States Shoe Corp. v. United States, 296 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
· cites it 2× “The court then decided that in addition to a refund of the tax payment, interest was due pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2411 . United States Shoe Corp.”
United States v. Paul H. \Bud\" Holmes", 822 F.2d 481 (5th Cir. 1987).
· cites it 3× “1972) (recognizing suit to recover fines under the Tucker Act and allowing only /Jost-judgment interest pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2411 (b)). . The version of 28 U.”
Atl. Richfield Co. v. Farm Credit Bank of Wichita, 226 F.3d 1138 (10th Cir. 2000).
“The claimant asserted that § 2411(a) controlled because his judgment was entered by a court rather than an administrative body. The Supreme Court rejected the claimant’s position, reasoning that the effect of the claimant’s argument would make “the starting date of interest in…”
George E. Warren Corp. v. United States, 341 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
· cites it 2× “2002), and emphasizes the court’s holding that a statutory provision, 28 U.S.C. § 2411 , providing for interest on tax refund judgments does not apply to HMT refunds because 28 U.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 2411(b) — 1 case
— 28 U.S.C. § 2411(c) — 1 case
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.