ILNews

IBA: Tax Liens Live After Debts, Clients Die

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

By Adam D. Christensen

In Shakespeare’s The Tempest, the drunken butler, Stephano, quips, “He that dies pays all his debts.” Obviously, the Bard’s fool had no experience with tax liens, which may cause as many problems for clients during and after life as the underlying debt itself.

Tax liens are filed when a taxpayer (individual or corporate) owes federal or state taxes from income, excise, employment, or sales tax. The taxing agencies that issue tax liens, the Internal Revenue Service and the Indiana Department of Revenue, assert that liens protect the government’s interest in a delinquent taxpayer’s property and increase the likelihood of collection. Given the scope and permanence of tax liens, these goals are doubtlessly met.

However, the unintended consequences of tax liens can serve not only as a complication but a blockade to collection and may cause the taxpayer irreparable harm along the way.

Tax liens attach to all assets owned by the taxpayer at the time the lien is filed and to any assets acquired afterward. Homes and other real estate, lines of credit, vehicles, equipment, even some investments may be effected. What’s more, tax liens stick to these assets until the underlying tax is paid in full regardless whether the taxpayer can afford to pay the debt or not.

By design, a tax lien restricts an owner’s ability to sell or transfer assets by clouding title. When the asset is sold, the government is entitled to an amount equal to its interest up to full, unencumbered value of the asset. Without payment, the lien remains and the asset cannot be transferred with clear title. Without clear title, the sale may be challenged in court and in due course reversed.

What’s more, Indiana is a “first to file” state with respect to secured interests, meaning the tax lien falls in line behind any prior secured interests in the asset, such as a mortgage. In foreclosure and property tax sale cases, a tax lien effectively wipes out any equity that may have been used to modify a mortgage or pay property taxes to avoid repossession.

Tax liens also impair a taxpayer’s ability to refinance. In addition to muddying priority and sapping equity, tax liens are listed on credit reports and can decrease a taxpayer’s credit rating by 100 points or more. Alarmingly, even seven years after the debt is paid in full, a notation showing a prior lien may negatively affect a taxpayer’s credit and ability to borrow.

For taxpayers working in fields such as finance, real estate, and law, tax liens can be ruinous. When a tax lien is filed, these people are at risk of losing their professional licenses, their ability to seek new employment, and even their current jobs.

Finally, and despite Stephano’s assertion, tax liens remain attached to assets even if the taxpayer dies before satisfying the debt. The liens entitle the taxing agency to an interest in the taxpayer’s estate presumably so the taxpayer can repay his debt from beyond the grave.

Often, tax liens are viewed by many practitioners as akin to judgment liens. However, tax liens may be more devastating because of the speed with which they are issued.

Feasibly, a tax lien may be filed roughly 90 days after tax assessment and without a court order. IRS procedures authorize automated lien filings when an unpaid tax balance is greater than $5,000. The IDR has no such restrictions and may file a lien without regard to the balance amount. Compare this to the lengthy, burdensome, and costly process necessary to secure a judgment lien.

In the past decade, the IRS has increased tax lien filings by 550%, and, though Indiana does not publish statistics relating to tax lien filings, it is likely the IDR has kept pace. Practitioners today are more likely than ever to encounter tax lien issues. Though attorneys may not be able to cure all the harms caused by a tax lien, here are four tips to ensure the damage is minimal.

The IRS may not file a lien for unpaid balances up to $25,000 for individuals and $10,000 for corporate entities if the taxpayer enters into an agreement to pay the debt in 60 or 24 months, respectively.

New IRS guidelines allow for taxpayers to request removal of tax liens if the underlying balance is reduced below these threshold amounts and the taxpayer agrees to have the agreement payments debited directly from a bank account.

Filing Form 12277 once a tax debt is paid will cause the IRS to “withdraw” a lien, rather than “remove” it, and will immediately expunge the lien from the taxpayer’s records.

Requesting lien subordination may not only give a taxpayer a chance to use equity to pay tax debt, it may help challenge the lien filing in Tax Court (Alessio Azzari v. Commissioner, 136 T.C. 9 (2011)).•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  2. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  3. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  4. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  5. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

ADVERTISEMENT