Whether a taxpayer's failure to timely petition the Tax Court for redetermination of a tax deficiency precludes subsequent judicial review of the tax assessment through alternative legal mechanisms

No question identified. : 2 1. Ordinarily, a person who wants to dispute the assessment or collection of a federal tax can do so “only after he pays it, by suing for a refund.” CIC Services, LLC v. IRS, 593 U.S. 209, 212 (2021). As to some taxes, however, Congress has provided taxpayers with an additional path to judicial review. For income, estate, gift, and certain other taxes, Congress has directed the Secretary of the Treasury to issue a “notice of * * * deficiency” to a taxpayer whom she determines has not reported all the tax owed for the year. 26 U.S.C. 6212(a). Under 26 U.S.C. 6213, the taxpayer can then petition the Tax Court for a “redetermination of the deficiency” before the Secretary may assess or collect the tax. 26 U.S.C. 6213(a). Section 6213(a) reads in relevant part as follows: Within 90 days * * * after the notice of deficiency authorized in section 6212 is mailed * * * , the taxpayer may file a petition with the Tax Court for a redetermination of the deficiency. Except as otherwise provided in [specified sections,] no assessment of a deficiency in respect of any [covered tax] and no levy or proceeding in court for its collection shall be made, begun, or prosecuted until such notice has been mailed to the taxpayer, nor until the expiration of such 90-day * * * period, x * * nor, if a petition has been filed with the Tax Court, until the decision of the Tax Court has become final. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 7421(a), the making of such assessment or the beginning of such proceeding or levy during the time such prohibition is in force may be enjoined by a proceeding in the proper court, including the Tax Court, and a refund may be ordered by such court of any amount collected within the period during which the Secretary is prohibited from collecting by levy or through a proceeding in a court under the provisions of this subsection. The Tax Court shall have no jurisdiction to enjoin any action or proceeding or order any refund under this subsection unless a timely petition for a redetermination of the deficiency has been filed and then only in respect of the deficiency that is the subject of such 3 petition. Any petition filed with the Tax Court on or before the last date specified for filing such petition by the Secretary in the notice of deficiency shall be treated as timely filed. 26 U.S.C. 6213(a). Other provisions address the consequences of a taxpayer’s choice about whether to invoke the Tax Court’s deficiency jurisdiction. “If the taxpayer does not file a petition with the Tax Court within the time prescribed in [Section 6213(a)], the deficiency, notice of which has been mailed to the taxpayer, shall be assessed, and shall be paid upon notice and demand from the Secretary.” 26 U.S.C. 6213(c). Upon such assessment, the United States obtains a statutory lien in its favor “upon all property and rights to property * * * belonging to [the taxpayer].” 26 U.S.C. 6321; see 26 U.S.C. 6322. The taxpayer is free, however, to challenge the Secretary’s calculation of the tax in a refund suit. See 26 U.S.C. 7422. On the other hand, “[i]f the taxpayer files a petition with the Tax Court” but is unsuccessful, 26 U.S.C. 6215(a), the Tax Court’s decision precludes further litigation about the amount of the deficiency. See ibid. (providing that “the entire amount redetermined as the deficiency by the decision of the Tax Court * * * shall be assessed and shall be paid”); 26 U.S.C. 6512 (a) (“[I]£ the taxpayer files a petition with the Tax Court within the time prescribed in section 6213 (a) x kK * no credit or refund [of tax] * * * in respect of which the Secretary has determined 4 the deficiency shall be allowed or made and no suit by the taxpayer for recovery of any part of the tax shall be instituted in any court except” to recover amounts paid or collected in excess of the deficiency determined by the Tax Court). That preclusive effect applies not only where the Tax Court agrees with the Secretary’s calc