http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-113_o7jp.pdf (PDF)
Ford Motor Company v. United States[1] (December 2, 2013) involved a small dispute over $445 million in interest on taxes:
In this case, after the Internal Revenue Service advised Ford Motor Company that it had underpaid its taxes from 1983 until 1989, Ford remitted a series of deposits to the IRS totaling $875 million. Those deposits stopped the accrual of interest that Ford would otherwise owe once the audits were completed and the amount of its underpayment was finally determined. See §6601; Rev. Proc. 84–58, 1984–2 Cum. Bull. 501. Later, Ford requested that the IRS treat the deposits as advance payments of the additional tax that Ford owed. Eventually the parties determined that Ford had overpaid its taxes in the relevant years, thereby entitling Ford to a return of the over-payment as well as interest. But the parties disagreed about when the interest began to run under 26 U. S. C. §6611(b)(1). Ford argued that “the date of overpayment” was the date that it first remitted the deposits to the IRS. Ibid. The Government countered that the date of overpayment was the date that Ford requested that the IRS treat the remittances as payments of tax. The difference between the parties’ competing interpretations of §6611(b) is worth some $445 million.
Ford was unsuccessful in both the Federal Court and the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. It applied to the Supreme Court for certiorari. At that stage the Government raised for the first time the argument that jurisdiction over this case was proper only in the United States Court of Federal Claims, not the Federal Court.
A unanimous Per Curiam decision of the Supreme Court granted certiorari and referred to case back to the Sixth Circuit:
This Court “is one of final review, ‘not of first view.’ ”
FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U. S. 502, 529 (2009) (quoting
Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U. S. 709, 718, n. 7 (2005) ). The Sixth Circuit should have the first opportunity to consider the Government’s new contention with respect to jurisdiction in this case. Depending on that court’s answer, it may also consider what impact, if any, the jurisdictional determination has on the merits issues, especially whether or not §6611 is a waiver of sovereign immunity that should be construed strictly.
The petition for certiorari is granted, the judgment of the Sixth Circuit is vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.
[1] 571 U.S. ___ (2013).