OCTOBER TERM, 2006
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
EC TERM OF YEARS TRUST v. UNITED STATES
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05–1541. Argued February 26, 2007—Decided April 30, 2007
Under 26 U. S. C. §7426(a)(1), if the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
levies upon a third party’s property to collect taxes owed by another,
the third party may bring a wrongful levy action against the United
States, so long as such action is brought before “the expiration of 9
months from the date of the levy,” §6532(c)(1). In contrast, the limi-
tations period for a tax refund action under 28 U. S. C. §1346(a)(1)
begins with an administrative claim that may be filed within at least
two years, and may be brought to court within another two years af-
ter an administrative denial. The IRS levied on a bank account in
which petitioner (Trust) had deposited funds because the IRS as-
sumed that the Trust’s creators had transferred assets to the Trust to
evade taxes. The bank responded with a check to the Treasury. Al-
most a year later, the Trust and others brought a §7426(a)(1) action
claiming wrongful levies, but the District Court dismissed the com-
plaint because it was filed after the 9-month limitations period had
expired. After unsuccessfully pursing a tax refund at the administra-
tive level, the Trust filed a refund action under §1346(a)(1). The Dis-
trict Court held that a wrongful levy claim under §7426(a)(1) was the
sole remedy possible and dismissed, and the Fifth Circuit affirmed.
Held: The Trust missed §7426(a)(1)’s deadline for challenging a levy,
and may not bring