Legal Opinion

Hinck v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided February 3, 2005No. 03-865TPublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*72OPINION

ALLEGRA, Judge.

If the amount of any tax imposed under the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C.) is not paid on or before the last date prescribed therefor, interest on the underpayment is imposed from that last date to the date paid at statutorily prescribed rates. 26 U.S.C. § 6621 (2000). Prior to 1986, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) lacked the authority to abate such interest. That changed when Congress, as part of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, Pub.L. No. 94-514, § 1563, 100 Stat. 2085, 2762 (1986), enacted section 6404(e)(1) of the Code, which authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury…

2Cases cited81 opinions

  1. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. VolpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983

76 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Hinck v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Fry v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  3. John F. Hinck and Pamela F. Hinck v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
  4. McNeil v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
  5. Grapevine Imports, Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API