Share with your friends

Ninth Circuit: Inconsistency between S corporation’s and shareholder’s returns

U.S. appeals court decision (Ninth Circuit)

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part a judgment of a federal district court in a taxpayer’s suit for refund of individual income tax.


Related content

The refund was based on an overstatement of net income reported on the return of the taxpayer’s S corporation (a return that was filed by a bankruptcy trustee), and the issue addressed by the Ninth Circuit was whether statements or forms attached by the taxpayer to his amended returns satisfied the requirement under section 6037(c)(2)(A)(ii) for a “statement identifying the inconsistency” between the S corporation’s return and the taxpayer’s return (as the shareholder of the S corporation).

The case is: Rubin v. United States, No, 16-56633 (9th Cir. September 24, 2018). Read the Ninth Circuit’s decision [PDF 59 KB]


The taxpayer was the sole shareholder of an S corporation that was put into an involuntary bankruptcy. The bankruptcy trustee filed the S corporation’s income tax returns for tax years 1998 - 2000, and reported over $66 million of cancellation of indebtedness income (among other items) for tax year 2000.

The taxpayer asserted that the net income for the S corporation for tax year 2000 was substantially overstated on the return filed by the bankruptcy trustee, and as a consequence, the amount of individual income that flowed through to the taxpayer was substantially overstated, resulting in an overpayment of tax. 

The taxpayer filed amended income tax returns seeking refunds of the tax overpayment. With the amended returns, the taxpayer included a statement describing how his items of income flowed from the S corporation and also stated his disagreement with the tax returns filed by the bankruptcy trustee. The claims for refunds for tax years 1998 and 1999 were based in part on carrying back losses from tax year 2000.

The IRS disallowed the refund claims after analyzing the claims based on substantive disagreements with the taxpayer's positions. After the taxpayer initiated tax refund litigation, the federal district court granted the government’s motion for judgment on the pleading by finding that the taxpayer had not satisfied a requirement under section 6037(c)(2)(A)(ii)—that is, if a tax return filed by the shareholder of an S corporation is inconsistent with the S corporation’s return, then the shareholder must file a statement identifying the inconsistency.


Ninth Circuit's decision

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit today reversed and remanded the case to the district court.

The appeals court found that although the taxpayer did not report the inconsistencies using Form 8082, Notice of Inconsistent Treatment or Administrative Adjustment Request (AAR), the taxpayer's statement provided all of the information required to be reported on Form 8082; and thus, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the filings made by the taxpayer satisfied the “statement identifying the inconsistency” rule.

In support of its conclusion, the Ninth Circuit found that the taxpayer's statements and supporting materials were sufficient to identify the relevant inconsistencies (as the government originally denied the taxpayer's claims on the merits). Thus, the Ninth Circuit held that the taxpayer’s filings identified the inconsistencies between his tax returns and those of the S corporation. 

© 2020 KPMG LLP, a Delaware limited liability partnership and the U.S. member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”) is a Swiss entity.

Member firms of the KPMG network of independent firms are affiliated with KPMG International. KPMG International provides no client services. No member firm has any authority to obligate or bind KPMG International or any other member firm vis-à-vis third parties, nor does KPMG International have any such authority to obligate or bind any member firm.

The KPMG logo and name are trademarks of KPMG International. KPMG International is a Swiss cooperative that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent member firms. KPMG International provides no audit or other client services. Such services are provided solely by member firms in their respective geographic areas. KPMG International and its member firms are legally distinct and separate entities. They are not and nothing contained herein shall be construed to place these entities in the relationship of parents, subsidiaries, agents, partners, or joint venturers. No member firm has any authority (actual, apparent, implied or otherwise) to obligate or bind KPMG International or any member firm in any manner whatsoever. The information contained in herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation. For more information, contact KPMG's Federal Tax Legislative and Regulatory Services Group at: + 1 202 533 4366, 1801 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006.

Connect with us


Want to do business with KPMG?


loading image Request for proposal