Tax Legal Services · Primary-source case analysis

Rodriguez v. FDIC: Tax-Refund Ownership Must Be Decided Without the Bob Richards Rule

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published April 23, 2026

Rodriguez limits federal common-lawmaking in disputes over who owns a refund generated through a consolidated corporate tax return.

A bank receiver and parent-company trustee claimed the same refund

After a bank entered FDIC receivership and its parent entered bankruptcy, the IRS issued a roughly $4 million refund attributable to the consolidated group. Their tax-allocation agreement did not end the ownership dispute.

The Bob Richards rule supplied a federal answer

Many courts had used a federal common-law presumption that a refund belongs to the group member whose losses generated it unless an agreement provides otherwise. The Tenth Circuit applied that approach.

Federal common law requires a special justification

The Supreme Court emphasized that judicial lawmaking is limited to narrow areas involving uniquely federal interests or congressional authorization. Ordinary property disputes over refunds do not justify a nationwide court-created allocation rule.

Disposition

The Court vacated and remanded for the lower court to determine ownership under applicable state law and the parties’ agreement. It expressed no view on which claimant should receive the money.

Key takeaways

• Review the consolidated-return allocation agreement first.
• Identify the governing state property and contract law.
• Do not rely on the discarded Bob Richards presumption.
• Draft allocation provisions to address insolvency and refund ownership expressly.