October Term 2011 · Docket 11-139
Does overstating business costs count as omitting income?
The dispute centers on whether overstating costs triggers a longer tax audit window.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
The government contends that overstating costs hides income from the tax return.
Home Concrete argues that the statute requires leaving out specific taxable items.
Justice Scalia questioned whether the statute's meaning changed after a prior decision.
Justice Kennedy asked if the legal split is more obscure than a previous case.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 47-3
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The government seeks to extend the audit period for tax returns. Home Concrete argues the statute does not cover cost overstatements. The case tests the meaning of a specific tax code phrase.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-25
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 17, 2012.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
What each side wants
The government wants the Court to allow a longer audit period for this tax return.
Home Concrete wants the Court to limit the audit period to the standard timeframe.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-25
What each side says
The government argues that overstating costs effectively omits income from the tax return.
Home Concrete argues that the statute only covers leaving out specific taxable items.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-25
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if the statute's meaning changed after a prior Court decision.
Justice Kennedy asked if the legal split is more obscure than a previous case.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 47-3
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of tax audit authority. It determines how long the government can review business returns. It clarifies the legal definition of income omission.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-25
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 47-3
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 21-17 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 21-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-25
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.