Sign Up

NCLA Site Search

Cases

Taha v. United States

Did we achieve our litigation objective? No. The Federal Circuit denied NCLA’s appeal of the income tax dispute.

Court Outcome: The Supreme Court denied certiorari.

Larger Impact: Brand X deference (the worst deference doctrine you’ve probably never heard of) continues to allow the IRS to get away with flawed revenue code interpretations.

Summary: Mr. Mohamed E. Taha (deceased) and his widow Ms. Sanaa M. Yassin filed a tax refund claim seeking refund of taxes paid in 2002, 2003, and 2004. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) claimed it never received the filing. The Court of Federal Claims conducted a trial on the question of whether Mr. Ali Taha (who is authorized to act on behalf of his deceased brother and his brother’s wife) had mailed the tax refund claim to IRS. The court concluded that Mr. Taha’s testimony was credible and that he indeed had mailed the tax refund claim before the deadline. However, IRS’s amended 2011 regulation prohibits witness testimony on the timely-mailing question and instead only recognizes certified or registered mail receipts as adequate proof of mailing. The regulation is in tension with the applicable statute that codifies the common-law mailbox rule permitting witness testimony on the question. The Court of Federal Claims deferred to the IRS’s interpretation under the Brand X deference doctrine.

In February 2020, the Supreme Court denied NCLA’s petition for a writ of certiorari in Baldwin v. United States. In Baldwin, NCLA had asked the Supreme Court to revisit and discard Brand X deference. Justice Clarence Thomas penned a sharp dissent from denial of certiorari calling on the Court to revisit Brand X because it is incompatible with “the Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and traditional tools of statutory interpretation.”

On appeal to the Federal Circuit in Mr. Taha’s case, NCLA urged that court to reject deference to IRS’s flawed interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code.

Ali Taha, Plaintiff

Kara Rollins
Litigation Counsel
NCLA FILINGS

Notice of Oral Argument in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

September 21, 2021 | Read More

Plaintiff-Appellant’s Reply Brief

June 1, 2021 | Read More

Plaintiff-Appellant’s Opening Brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

February 1, 2021 | Read More

Order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Denying Appellee’s Motion for Summary Affirmance

November 24, 2020 | Read More

Plaintiff-Appellant’s Response to Appellee’s Motion for Summary Affirmance

October 23, 2020 | Read More

PRESS RELEASES

NCLA Brief Asks Federal Circuit to Reject Deference to Retroactive IRS Rule on Proof of Mailing

February 2, 2021 | Read More

IN THE MEDIA

Government Defends Regulation on How to Meet Tax Deadlines

February 7, 2023

IRS Never Received Couples Tax Refund Bid, Fed. Circ. Told

February 7, 2023

Appeal Tests Court Deference to IRS on Tax Refund Lawsuit

February 7, 2023

IRS Rules Shouldnt Thwart Couples Refund Bid, Fed. Circ. Told

February 7, 2023

CASE HIGHLIGHTS

RELATED CASES

SHARE THIS CASE

Enter your email address above to be notified whenever we post a new document to this case.