Monday, August 18, 2025

Third Circuit Holds Tax Taxpayer Fraud is not Required for 6501(c)(1) Unlimited Statute of Limitations, Creating Conflict (8/18/25; 10/22/25)

Added 10/22/25 @ 3:40pm: On October 17, 2025, the Third Circuit denied rehearing and rehearing en banc and issued a revised opinion in Murrin v. Commissioner, ___ F.4th ___ (3rd Cir. 10/17/25), CA3 here and GS here. The revised opinion reaches the same result as the earlier opinion--fraud on the return permits the unlimited statute of limitations regardless of whether or not it is the taxpayer's fraud. I have not analyzed the opinion to see where precisely the changes were. The opinion is a straight-foward textualist reading of the Code provision. It is apparent that, as with the original opinion, the author is not that familiar with tax procedure. (See e.g., p. 4 n. 1, basically same as original opinion.)

In Murrin v. Commissioner, ___ F.4th ___ (3rd Cir. 8/18/25), CA3 here and TN here, the Court held that the §6501(c)(1), here, unlimited statute of limitations applying "In the case of a false or fraudulent return with the intent to evade tax" applies even without the taxpayer's personal fraud. The opinion is a straightforward textualist interpretation of the governing statute. Since the opinion is relatively short, I am not sure my nitpicking (aka pontificating) over the reasoning and specific text would be helpful to readers of this Blog, most of whom are already familiar with the issue.

In the event my thoughts may be helpful, I link here first my prior blogs generated by the search terms "allen fraud limitations" which picks up the blogs that discussed the issue. (If you click that link, the returns are first in some relevance scoring of the content order for the terms but there is a link to put them in reverse date order.) The more recent blog discussions that I think may be most helpful to readers wanting more than offered in Murrin are:

  • On the Tax Court decision in Murrin: Tax Court Again Declines to Reconsider Its Holding that the Preparer's Fraud without the Taxpayer's Fraud Invokes Unlimited Statute of Limitations (Federal Tax Procedure Blog 1/25/24; 2/5/24), here (where I discuss and link Professor Bryan Camp's discussion of the Tax Court opinion in Murrin) (those reading the Third Circuit opinion in Murrin will see that Professor Camp filed an amicus in favor of the taxpayer's position).
  • On BASR P’ship v. United States, 795 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2015), which Murrin conflicts (Murrin substantially adopts the dissenting opinion in BASR), I did not write a separate blog on the BASR opinion, but I wrote one on the court awarding attorneys fees under § 7430: Major Attorneys Fee Award for BASR Partnership Prevailing on the Allen Issue in Federal Circuit (Federal Tax Procedure Blog 2/11/17), here. This conflict certainly insures a petition for cert by Murrin. I suspect that there may be a flurry of amicus briefs on the petition and, if cert is granted, on the merits briefing because a lot of wealthy taxpayers investing in fraudulent taxpayers have a dog in the hunt, so to speak.
  • On City Wide Transit, Inc. v. Commissioner 709 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2013) discussed in MurrinSecond Circuit Holds That Fraud on the Return -- Even If Not the Taxpayer's -- Causes an Unlimited Civil Assessment Statute of Limitations to Apply (Federal Tax Procedure Blog 2/4/13), here.
  • My early venture into the subject discussing an important extension of a holding that the taxpayer's fraud is not required if the return is fraudulent: Civil Tax Statute of Limitations for Fraudulent Tax Shelters (Federal Tax Procedure Blog 12/19/09), here.

 This blog entry is cross-posted on the Federal Tax Procedure Blog, here.

Wednesday, August 13, 2025

Court of Appeals Reverses on Statute of Limitations Grounds for Failure Foreign Evidence Tolling Under 18 USC § 3292(a)(1) and For Resentencing (8/13/25)

In United States v. Gyetvay, 149 F.4th 1213 (11th Cir. 2025), 11th Cir. here amd GS here. the Court

  • reversed Gyetvay’s convictions in Counts 11 and 12 for Willfully Failing to File Tax Returns for the years 2013 and 2014;
  • otherwise sustained on the counts of conviction; and
  • remanded for re-sentencing without the reversed Counts and for restitution.

I provide the following chart to show what the Court of Appeals did and the possibility of retrial on the Counts for which the jury hung. I then provide some commentary below the chart.

Counts

Charge

Sentence Max

Jury Verdict

Court of Appeals

Retrial

1-3

Aiding or Assisting § 7206(2) years 2006, 2007, 2008

9 years (3 years on each count)

Hung

 

Yes

4-6

Tax Evasion § 7201  Years 2007, 2008, 2009

15 years (5 years each count)

Hung

 

Yes

7-9

Willfully Failing to File § 7203 Years 2010, 2011, 2012,

3 years (1 year each count)

Hung

 

No - Foreclosed by reversal of convictions on Counts 10 & 11.

10 & 11

Willfully Failing to File § 7203 Years 2013, 2014

2 years (1 year each count)

Guilty

Reversed – Statute of Limitations was not tolled under 18 USC § 3292(a)(1)

No

12

Willfully Making False Statements on Streamlined Procedures Certification 18 USC § 1001 & 2 

5 years

Guilty

Did Not Appeal, but vacates restitution order based on this Count

Re-sentencing

13

Willfully Failing to File FBAR - 31 USC. §§ 5314 & 5322(a); 31 C.F.R. §§ 1010.350, 1010.306(c)-(d) and 1010.840(b)
Year 2014

5 years

Guilty

Affirmed

No

14

Wire Fraud Year 2014

20 years

Acquitted

Govt did not appeal

No

15

Wire Fraud No year

20 years

Hung

 

Yes

JAT Comments: