Gets No Help from Boechler
That’s the bad news from Judge Adam B. (“Sport”) Landy to Arbor Vita Corporation d.b.a. Hemediagnostics, 166 T. C. 5, filed 3/16/26. Heme, a CA Corp, was decorpitated by the CA Franchise Tax Board for failure to pay State taxes. While thus powerless, Heme got a NFTL for failure to pay FUTA and file W-2s sustained by Appeals, so Heme timely petitioned. Heme doesn’t get restored to CA good standing until five (count ’em, five) months after the 30-day claim processing limitation has run.
IRS claims want of corporate capacity and moves to toss. If this sounds familiar to my longtime readers, you’re right; see my blogpost “Being and Nothingness,” 5/7/13.
Except.
Judge Sport Landy checks CA law and finds while revival gives back corporate powers and allows continuation of litigation, it doesn’t deprive opponent in ongoing litigation of claims or defenses. IOW, revival doesn’t defeat SOL Judge Sport Landy is more elegant in his phraseology. “…if relation back of revival would prejudice or invalidate an opposing party’s defense that accrued because of the suspension of corporate status, regardless of the nature of that defense, then revivor cannot retroactively validate an otherwise procedural act.” 166 T. C. 5, at p. 5.
What about Boechler?
Cases like Hom, referred to in my above-cited blogpost, were deficiency cases, not CDPs. So there is some wiggle room for defunct corporations in CDPs.
Except.
“…31 days after issuing the Notice of Determination, the Commissioner accrued a statute of limitations defense against any petition filed by Arbor Vita. To retroactively validate Arbor Vita’s Petition at this juncture would prejudice the Commissioner’s defense by effectively nullifying it because Arbor Vita’s Petition would be considered valid and timely filed. Therefore, under California law, we cannot relate Arbor Vita’s corporate revival back to the time it filed its Petition.” 166 T. C. 5, at p. 7. (Citations omitted).
Except.
Doesn’t Boechler take away jurisdictional SOL?
Yes, but here the petition was timely filed. While CA law allows revival to validate a notice of appeal filed while a corporation was defunct, the Supremes have said pore l’il ol’ Tax Court isn’t an appellate court.
Equitable tolling works to extend the 30-day cutoff for petitions from a CDP NOD. But since the petition was timely filed here, there’s nothing to extend.
Heme’s trusty attorney gets a Taishoff “Good Try, Third Class.”