It’s tax season again, so it’s time to pay the piper. Despite your efforts to responsibly report and file your taxes with all the allowable deductions and/or adjustments, the Government will find a way to feed itself. The State of Connecticut found a way to do just that to a Contractor despite the State owing the Contractor on a judgment.
Following a successful arbitration, the State of Connecticut Department of Transportation owed to the Contractor a judgment of several million dollars. But, when the Contractor received payment of that judgment from the State, it was “short” by over one million dollars. Upon investigation, the Contractor learned that the State Comptroller had unilaterally reduced the judgment to cover the Contractor’s unpaid taxes. Such taxes were unrelated to the issues successfully arbitrated in the Contractor’s favor.
The Contractor valiantly argued the State could not reduce the judgment amount because the DOT failed to prove the taxes as a setoff or counterclaim during the arbitration. Indeed, the DOT alleged but did not put forth any evidence to prove the amount or that the taxes were overdue. Nevertheless, payment of the judgment triggered review by the Comptroller and State tax statutes authorized the withholding to pay the Contractor’s tax debt.
Paraphrasing an excerpt from Common Sense (1776) by Thomas Paine, government is like an octopus with too many arms and, when one arm fails, another rises to feed the beast.
Connecticut Department of Transportation v. White Oak Corporation, 332 Conn. 776 (Aug. 20, 2019).
Roads & Bridges |Let the Contract Lead
LET THE CONTRACT LEAD
Documents offer guidance needed to manage risk without derailing projects
Construction is an industry of managed risk. Whether the prices […]
Roads & Bridges | When is an Invoice Really an Invoice?
WHEN IS AN INVOICE REALLY AN INVOICE?
All court decisions are opinions. Appellate court decisions are typically made by a panel of three […]
Roads & Bridges | Clarifying Punitive Damages
CLARIFYING PUNITIVE DAMAGES
In June 2021, the South Dakota Department of Transportation contracted for the demolition and construction of a bridge on State […]
Roads & Bridges | When Approximate Means Assumed Risk
WHEN APPROXIMATE MEANS ASSUMED RISK
A New York Court Shows How Performance Specifications Can Leave Contractors Holding the Bag
Sometimes when we are told […]
Roads & Bridges | From Roman Arches to AI
FROM ROMAN ARCHES TO AI
Can Construction Evolve Without Risk?
The construction industry blends old with new. From ancient Roman archways and aqueducts and […]
Roads & Bridges | Caught in the Middle
CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE
New Mexico bridge case highlights the importance of written agreements for changes and delay compensation
In construction contracting, hope for […]
Roads & Bridges | Wait and It’s Waived
WAIT AND IT’S WAIVED
Roads & Bridges | Supreme Court Ruling on Arbitration Delay
Don’t wait to arbitrate! Progressing too far down the litigation […]
Roads & Bridges | Court Defines When Contractors Can Withdraw Due to Mistakes
BIDDING BLUNDER
Roads & Bridges | Court Defines When Contractors Can Withdraw Due to Mistakes
For over 125 years, the vast majority of jurisdictions […]
FEDERAL CONTRACT TERMINATION OR MODIFICATION
The White House has directed Agency heads to “terminate or modify . . . covered contracts.” With some exceptions, there are […]
