Getting Tax Money Back After COVID-19
Getting Tax Money Back After COVID-19
COVID-19 後如何申請退還稅金
Introduction
A court says some people can get their tax penalty money back from the COVID-19 years.
法院表示，部分人士可以申請退還 COVID-19 期間被扣除的稅務罰金。
Main Body
The court says the IRS was wrong. The IRS took extra money from people between January 2020 and July 2023. People can ask for this money back.
法院表示 IRS 的做法錯誤。IRS 在 2020 年 1 月至 2023 年 7 月期間向民眾多收了款項。民眾現在可以申請退還這筆款項。
Some government leaders disagree. They are fighting this in a higher court. You should send Form 843 now to protect your money. You must do this by July 10, 2026.
部分政府領導人對此並不認同，他們正向更高層級的法院提出上訴。您現在應提交 Form 843 以保障您的權益。您必須在 2026 年 7 月 10 日前完成此操作。
First, get your tax papers from 2019 to 2021. Then, write the name 'Kwong' on Form 843. Send it by mail. You must still pay your current taxes now.
首先，請準備好 2019 年至 2021 年的報稅文件。接著，在 Form 843 上寫下 "Kwong" 這個名字，並以郵寄方式寄出。您目前仍須照常繳納現有的稅款。
Conclusion
You can ask for your money by July 10, 2026. But you must wait for the final court decision.
您可以在 2026 年 7 月 10 日前申請退款，但必須等待法院的最終裁決。
Vocabulary Learning
🕒 Time & Deadlines
In this text, we see how to talk about a limit in time. When you see the word by, it means "no later than."
- By July 10, 2026 This is the last possible day. Do it before or on this date.
🛠️ Action Steps (The Sequence)
To tell someone how to do something, use simple words to start the sentence:
- First, get your papers.
- Then, write the name.
Tip: Use First Then Next to guide a reader through a process.
Vocabulary Learning
Legal Options for COVID-19 Tax Penalty Refunds: Kwong v. United States
COVID-19 稅務罰款退款的法律途徑：Kwong 訴美國政府案
Introduction
A federal court decision has created a possible way for taxpayers to get back penalties and interest charged during the COVID-19 pandemic disaster period.
聯邦法院的一項裁決，為納稅人提供了一種可能拿回 COVID-19 疫情災難期間被收取罰款與利息的方法。
Main Body
The court ruling in Kwong v. United States states that tax filing and payment deadlines should have been paused from January 20, 2020, to May 11, 2023, including an extra 60-day extension. Consequently, the court suggests that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) wrongly charged penalties and interest for the period ending July 10, 2023. Because there is a standard three-year limit for refund requests, the National Taxpayer Advocate emphasized that July 10, 2026, is the final deadline to submit a claim.
Kwong 訴美國政府案的法院裁決指出，從 2020 年 1 月 20 日到 2023 年 5 月 11 日（包括額外 60 天的延期）期間，報稅與繳稅的期限應予以暫停。因此，法院認為美國國稅局 (IRS) 在截至 2023 年 7 月 10 日的期間內，錯誤地收取了罰款與利息。由於退款申請有三年的標準期限，全國納稅人倡導者 (National Taxpayer Advocate) 特別強調，2026 年 7 月 10 日是提交申請的最後期限。
However, different government agencies disagree on this issue. While the National Taxpayer Advocate asserts that people must file now to protect their legal rights, the U.S. Treasury and the Department of Justice have a stricter interpretation of the law and are appealing the decision. Because of this legal uncertainty, experts advise filing a 'protective claim' using Form 843. This ensures that if the court's decision is upheld, the taxpayer can still receive a refund; whereas, if they do not file by the deadline, they will lose that right forever.
然而，不同政府部門對此議題持有分歧。雖然全國納稅人倡導者主張民眾必須立即申請以保障法律權利，但美國財政部與司法部對法律的解釋較為嚴格，且正對該裁決提出上訴。由於存在此法律不確定性，專家建議使用 843 表格提交「保護性申請」。這能確保若法院裁決維持原判，納稅人仍可獲得退款；反之，若未在期限前申請，將永久失去該權利。
To apply, taxpayers should get their tax account transcripts from 2019 to 2021 to see exactly what they owe. Form 843 must clearly mention the Kwong case and be sent to the correct service center, preferably by certified mail. Furthermore, filing a protective claim does not stop current tax obligations. Taxpayers must continue making payments to avoid new penalties, which can range from 0.5% to 5% per month, up to a maximum of 25%.
申請時，納稅人應獲取 2019 年至 2021 年的稅務帳戶對帳單，以確認欠款金額。843 表格必須明確提及 Kwong 案，並寄至正確的服務中心，建議使用掛號信。此外，提交保護性申請並不免除目前的納稅義務。納稅人必須繼續繳稅以避免產生新罰款，新罰款每月可能在 0.5% 至 5% 之間，最高可達 25%。
Conclusion
Taxpayers can file protective claims by July 10, 2026, although the final result depends on the outcome of the current federal appeals.
納稅人可在 2026 年 7 月 10 日前提交保護性申請，儘管最終結果取決於目前聯邦上訴的 outcome。
Vocabulary Learning
⚡ The "Logic Bridge": Moving from A2 to B2
At the A2 level, you use simple connectors like and, but, and because. To reach B2, you need Complex Logical Connectors. These words don't just connect sentences; they tell the reader how ideas relate to each other.
🧩 The "Contrast" Upgrade
Look at the text. Instead of using "but," the author uses "However" and "Whereas."
- A2 Style: I want a refund, but the government says no.
- B2 Style: I am eligible for a refund; however, the government disagrees.
- B2 Style: Some agencies support the claim, whereas others have a stricter interpretation.
Pro Tip: Use whereas when you are comparing two different facts in one sentence. Use however to start a new sentence that contradicts the previous one.
🛠️ The "Consequence" Shift
Stop using so for everything. The article uses "Consequently" and "Furthermore."
- Consequently: Use this when one event is a direct legal or logical result of another.
- Example: The court ruled in favor of the taxpayer; consequently, the IRS may have wrongly charged fees.
- Furthermore: Use this to add a second, more important piece of information to your argument.
- Example: You must file Form 843; furthermore, you should send it via certified mail.
📈 Vocabulary Expansion: Precision
B2 students stop using "general" verbs and start using "precise" verbs. Notice the shift in this text:
| A2 Word (General) | B2 Word (Precise) | Context in Article |
|---|---|---|
| Say / Think | Assert | "The Advocate asserts that..." |
| Keep / Stay | Uphold | "If the decision is upheld..." |
| Give back | Refund | "...to receive a refund." |
Challenge for you: Next time you write a paragraph, replace every "but" with "however" and every "and" with "furthermore." See how the tone changes from a conversation to a professional report.
Vocabulary Learning
Legal Implications of Kwong v. United States Regarding COVID-19 Tax Penalty Refunds
Kwong v. United States 案件關於 COVID-19 稅務罰金退款之法律影響
Introduction
A federal court ruling has established a potential pathway for taxpayers to recover penalties and interest assessed during the COVID-19 pandemic disaster period.
聯邦法院的一項裁決為納稅人追回在 COVID-19 疫情災難期間被徵收的罰金與利息建立了一個潛在路徑。
Main Body
The judicial determination in Kwong v. United States posits that tax filing and payment deadlines should have been suspended throughout the federally declared COVID-19 disaster window, spanning January 20, 2020, to May 11, 2023, inclusive of a subsequent 60-day statutory extension. Consequently, the court suggests that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) erroneously assessed penalties and interest for non-compliance during the interval ending July 10, 2023. Given the standard three-year statute of limitations for refund requests, the National Taxpayer Advocate has identified July 10, 2026, as the critical deadline for the submission of claims.
Kwong v. United States 的司法判定認為，在聯邦宣布的 COVID-19 災難期間（自 2020 年 1 月 20 日至 2023 年 5 月 11 日，含隨後 60 天的法定延期），報稅與繳稅截止日期應予以暫停。因此，法院認為美國國稅局 (IRS) 對於在 2023 年 7 月 10 日結束的期間內因不合規而徵收的罰金與利息屬錯誤。鑑於退款申請有三年的標準請求期限，國家納稅人倡導專員 (National Taxpayer Advocate) 將 2026 年 7 月 10 日定為提交申請的關鍵截止日期。
Stakeholder positioning remains divergent. While the National Taxpayer Advocate emphasizes the necessity of filing to preserve legal rights, the U.S. Treasury Department and the Department of Justice maintain a narrower interpretation of the postponement statute and have initiated appeals within the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Due to this legal instability, the submission of a 'protective claim' via Form 843 is advised. Such a filing ensures that if the Kwong precedent is upheld, the claimant remains eligible for restitution, whereas failure to file by the deadline would result in a permanent forfeiture of that eligibility.
利害關係人的立場仍不一致。雖然國家納稅人倡導專員強調提交申請以維護法律權利的必要性，但美國財政部與司法部對延期法令採取較狹義的解釋，並已向美國聯邦巡迴上訴法院提起上訴。由於法律狀態不穩定，建議透過 Form 843 提交「保護性申請」。此類申請可確保若 Kwong 先例被維持，申請人仍有資格獲得補償；而若未能在截止日期前提交，將導致該資格永久喪失。
Procedural requirements for claimants include the acquisition of tax account transcripts for the 2019–2021 period to determine precise liabilities. Form 843 must explicitly cite the Kwong case and be submitted to the appropriate service center, preferably via certified mail to ensure documented receipt. While electronic filing was introduced on July 1, 2024, the complexity of calculating partial claims may necessitate professional consultation. Furthermore, the filing of a protective claim does not suspend current tax obligations; taxpayers must continue payments to avoid the accrual of additional penalties, which range from 0.5% to 5% monthly, capped at 25%.
申請人的程序要求包括獲取 2019 至 2021 年期間的稅務帳戶對帳單，以確定精確的欠款責任。Form 843 必須明確引用 Kwong 案，並提交至適當的服務中心，建議使用掛號信以確保有收據證明。雖然 2024 年 7 月 1 日推出了電子申報，但計算部分請求的複雜性可能需要專業諮詢。此外，提交保護性申請不會暫停目前的納稅義務；納稅人必須繼續繳稅以避免產生額外罰金，罰金範圍為每月 0.5% 至 5%，上限為 25%。
Conclusion
Taxpayers may file protective claims by July 10, 2026, although the finality of these refunds depends on the outcome of ongoing federal appeals.
納稅人可在 2026 年 7 月 10 日前提交保護性申請，儘管這些退款的最終結果取決於目前聯邦上訴案的結果。
Vocabulary Learning
The Architecture of 'Hedged Authority': Navigating Legal Modality
To move from B2 to C2, a student must stop treating verbs as simple indicators of action and start treating them as instruments of epistemic modality—the expression of degrees of certainty and commitment to a proposition.
In this text, we see a masterful display of Legal Hedging. The writer avoids absolute declarations to protect the integrity of the legal analysis, utilizing specific linguistic pivots:
1. The Transition from 'Posit' to 'Suggest'
Notice the sequence: "The judicial determination... posits that... Consequently, the court suggests..."
- Posit: A high-level academic verb meaning to assume as a fact or put forward as a basis for argument. It establishes a theoretical foundation.
- Suggest: In a general context, this is a weak verb. In a C2 legal context, it is a calculated hedge. The author uses it to indicate that while the court's logic points to a specific conclusion, the finality is not yet absolute (due to the pending appeals mentioned later).
2. Nominalization for Objectivity
B2 students write: "The court decided that..." C2 scholars write: "The judicial determination in Kwong v. United States posits..."
By transforming the action (decided) into a noun (determination), the author shifts the focus from the people (the judges) to the legal instrument itself. This creates an aura of impersonality and objective authority essential for high-level professional English.
3. Lexical Precision: 'Divergent' vs. 'Different'
"Stakeholder positioning remains divergent." While different describes a state of non-similarity, divergent describes a process of moving apart from a common point. In legal disputes, parties don't just have 'different' views; their interpretations diverge from a singular statute, implying a systemic conflict rather than a simple disagreement.
C2 Synthesis: To replicate this style, replace descriptive adjectives with relational ones (e.g., divergent, inclusive, subsequent) and swap active verbs for modal markers that indicate the strength of a claim (e.g., posits, maintains, underscores).