Court explained in Bufferd v. Commissioner, 506 U.S. 523, 525 (1993), Subchapter S of the Code implements "a pass-through system under which corporate income, losses, deductions, and credits are attributed to individ-ual shareholders in a manner akin to the tax treatment of partnerships." In 1992, these two Subchapter S corporations became
Bufferd ultimately agreed to the deficiency assessed by the Commissioner to the extent of the disallowance of the direct partnership loss. Bufferd argued, however, that the Commissioner could not assess a deficiency with regard to the Compo adjustment because the statute of limitations had run with respect to Compo's tax liability. In Bufferd v. Commissioner,1 the Supreme Court held that a deficiency as serted against an S corporation shareholder was timely when it was asserted more than three years after the filing of the S corporation return, but within an In Bufferd v. Commissioner,' the Supreme Court resolved the dis-pute involving the proper application of the statute of limitations to an S corporation and its shareholders.' Contrary to the holding of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Kelley v. Commissioner, and the In Bufferd v. Commissioner, 506 U.S. 523 (1993), the Supreme Court addressed that conflict in the context of a subchapter S corporation and its shareholder. In Bufferd, it was held that adjustments to a shareholder's income are governed by the shareholder's period for assessment.
Jan 25, 1993 · SHELDON B. BUFFERD, PETITIONER v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the second circuit [January 25, 1993] Justice White delivered the opinion of the Court.
MEMORANDUM OPINION LEE District Judge. Before the Court are Defendant s Motion for Summary Judgment Document No. 7 and Plaintiffupp23311100 The Tax Court found for the Commissioner, rejecting Bufferd's argument that the claim was time barred because the disallowance was based on an error in Compo's return, for which the 3 year period had lapsed. BUFFERD v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT No. 91-7804.
See Harkness v. Fitzgerald, 1997 ME 207, ¶ 5, 701 A.2d 370, 372. "[L]imitations statutes barring the collection of taxes otherwise due and unpaid are strictly construed in favor of the State." Koch, 1999 ME 35, ¶ 7 n.4, 724 A.2d 1251, 1254 n.4 (citing Bufferd v. Commissioner, 506 U.S. 523, 527 n.6 (1993); Badaracco v.
Kelley v. Commissioner, 877 F.2d 756 (CA9 1989), held that the filing date of the corporation's return controls. The Fifth and Eleventh Circuits have joined the Second Circuit in declining to follow Kelley. See Green v. Commissioner, 963 F.2d 783 (CA5 1992); Fehlhaber v. Commissioner, 954 F.2d 653 (CA11 1992).