New York Court of Appeals, 1996

Lorenz v. Division of Taxation of Department of Taxation & Finance

New York Court of Appeals · Decided March 26, 1996

87 N.Y.2d 1004; 665 N.E.2d 191; 642 N.Y.S.2d 621; 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 304

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Dong Ming Li v. Commissioner of Taxation & Finance (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff conceded that he was "a person required” to collect sales tax and was consequently personally liable for any such *1006tax that was or should have been collected (Tax Law § 1131 [1]; § 1132 [a]; § 1133 [a]). It follows that plaintiff was also subject to Tax Law § 1145, which provides that "[a]ny person failing * * * to pay or pay over any tax * * * shall be subject to a penalty * * * [and] interest” on the amount of unpaid tax. Plaintiffs contention that in this context the "person” referred to in section 1145 is the corporate entity on which the tax obligation was initially imposed is belied by the language and import of subdivision (a) (7). Under that subdivision, penalties and interest are to be "collected and enforced in the same manner as the tax.” Since the obligation to pay the tax may be enforced against plaintiff personally, so too can the assessed penalties and interest.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.