Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

756 F.2d 52

Docket No. 84-1956.

Wall v. United States

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Feb. 13, 1985.

Decided Feb. 27, 1985.

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1985-02-27

2 counsel of record

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 6702 · 26 U.S.C. § 6703

Relies on United States v. Lee · Kahn v. United States · Welch v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1985-02-27

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently July 2008

15 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

110198519902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*53Richard H. Zimmermann, Iowa City, Iowa, for appellant.

¶2Glenn L. Archer, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., for appellee.

¶3Before LAY, Chief Judge, and HEANEY and FAGG, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5David Wall filed a 1982 tax return in which he claimed a “war tax deduction” of $6,060. He attached a statement with his return explaining that he was choosing not “to contribute to the war machine of this country” based upon his religious convictions, and that he desired to contribute the refund for charitable purposes.

¶6Upon receiving Wall’s 1982 return, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) assessed a penalty of $500 against him under 26 U.S.C. § 6702. Wall paid fifteen percent of the penalty, and filed a claim for a refund with the IRS pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6703(c). The IRS denied this claim, and Wall then filed suit for a refund in federal district court. The district court granted summary judgment for the IRS. Wall now brings this appeal.

¶7On appeal, Wall contends that the penalty violates his first amendment rights of free speech and free exercise of religion. The Supreme Court has held, however, that the necessities of revenue collection through a sound tax system raise governmental interests sufficiently compelling to outweigh the free exercise rights of those who find the tax objectionable on bona fide religious grounds. United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252, 260, 102 S.Ct. 1051, 1056, 71 L.Ed.2d 127 (1982). Congress enacted section 6702 in order to improve compliance with the federal tax laws, responding to “the rapid growth in deliberate defiance of the tax laws by tax protestors.” S.Rep. No. 494, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. 74, 277-78, reprinted in 1982 U.S.Code Cong. & Ad. News 781, 1023-25. Consequently, the courts have clearly held that taxpayers assessed a penalty under section 6702 for claiming a “war tax deduction” are not unlawfully penalized for expressing their moral or religious beliefs, but are penalized because they file returns containing substantially incorrect self-assessments based on a clearly unallowable credit. See, e.g., Kahn v. United States, 753 F.2d 1208 (3d Cir.1985); Welch v. United States, 750 F.2d 1101, 1105-1110 (1st Cir.1985).

¶8The judgment of the district court is therefore affirmed.

/756/f2d/52 · .json · Public domain