Source: http://oicattorney.blogspot.com/2009_11_01_archive.html
Timestamp: 2017-07-20 14:35:44
Document Index: 430401783

Matched Legal Cases: ['§301', 'art 301', '§301', '§301', 'art5', '§ 301', '§301', '§301', 'art5', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§300', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', 'art5', '§301', 'art5', '§301', '§301', 'art 301', 'art 301', 'ART 301', 'art 301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§ 601', '§ 6103', 'art 301', '§1', '§1', '§1', '§601', '§1', '§601', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§6601', '§1', '§301', 'art 301', 'art 301', 'ART 301', 'art 301', '§301', '§1', '§301', '§1', '§1', '§1', '§301', '§301', '§301', '§1', '§301']

IRS Tax Attorney: November 2009
Part pay Installment Agreement Final RegulationsThe IRS has issued final regulations relating to the payment of tax liabilities through installment agreements. The regulations reflect changes to the law made by the Taxpayer Bill of Rights II (P.L. 104-168), the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-206) and the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-357). The final regulations generally adopt proposed regulations issued in March 2007 (NPRM REG-100841-97), with revisions to two provisions made in response to comments received by the IRS. The regulations are effective November 25, 2009.The final regulations adopt without change procedures set forth in the proposed regulations regarding submission and consideration by the IRS of proposed installment agreements, and acceptance, form and terms of installment agreements. The regulations provide that a proposed installment agreement must be submitted according to the procedures prescribed by the IRS, and becomes pending when it is accepted for processing. An installment agreement request is not accepted until the IRS notifies the taxpayer or the taxpayer's representative of the acceptance.The final regulations clarify that partial payment agreements do not reduce the amount of taxes, interest or penalties owed. They also clarify that the IRS may enter into agreements that end before the expiration of the period of limitations on collection. Thus, a partial payment installment agreement ending before the expiration of the collection period of limitations would allow the IRS to collect the balance of the tax liability after the agreement expired. However, the preamble to the final regulations notes that the IRS does not currently enter into partial payment installment agreements that expire before the end of the collection statute and has no plans to do so routinely in the future. The final regulations also require the IRS to review partial payment agreements every two years to determine whether the financial condition of the taxpayer has significantly changed. Further, the regulations provide that, while an installment agreement is in effect, the IRS may require the taxpayer to provide updated financial information at any time.In addition, the final regulations provide that the IRS may not notify a taxpayer of the rejection of an installment agreement until an independent review of the proposed rejection is completed. The final regulations also allow taxpayers to appeal a rejection of an installment agreement to the IRS Office of Appeals within 30 days of being notified of the rejection.The IRS may modify or terminate an installment agreement if it determines that the taxpayer's financial condition has significantly changed or if the taxpayer fails to meet certain requirements. The proposed regulations provided that the IRS may modify or terminate an installment agreement if the taxpayer fails to provide a financial condition update requested by the Service. The final regulations clarify that the IRS may terminate an installment agreement only if the taxpayer provides materially inaccurate or incomplete information in connection with a requested financial update. Further, the final regulations modify the rule provided in the proposed regulations to explicitly allow taxpayers to request a modification or termination of an existing installment agreement. Additionally, the final regulations clarify that a taxpayer must comply with the terms of an existing installment agreement while a request for modification is being considered, and that a proposed modification will not result in a suspension of the statute of limitations on collection.The final regulations generally prohibit the IRS from taking any collection activity while a proposed installment agreement is pending, while an installment agreement is in effect, or during the 30-day period following the rejection of a proposed installment agreement or the termination of an installment agreement. Further, the final regulations provide that the statute of limitations on collection under Code Sec. 6502 is suspended while a proposed installment agreement is pending, plus 30 days following a rejection of a proposed installment agreement, and during any appeal. The final regulations also provide that each taxpayer with an installment agreement must also be provided with an annual statement showing the balance due at the beginning of the year, the payments made during the year, and the remaining balance due at the end of the year.T.D. 9473, filed with the Federal Register on, November 24, 2009. AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.ACTION: Final regulations.SUMMARY: This document contains final regulations relating to the payment of tax liabilities in installments. The regulations reflect changes to the law made by the Taxpayer Bill of Rights II, the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, and the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. The regulations will affect taxpayers submitting installment agreements to the IRS.DATES: Effective Date: These regulations are effective on [ INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].Applicability Date: For the date of applicability, see §301.6159(k). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Walter Ryan, (202) 622-3620 (not a tollfree number).SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Background This document contains amendments to the Procedure and Administration Regulations (26 CFR part 301) under section 6159 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code). Section 6159 allows the IRS to enter into agreements for the payment of any unpaid tax in installments. Taxpayers may request administrative review of IRS decisions to terminate installment agreements pursuant to section 6159(e), added to the Code by section 202 of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights II, Public Law 104-168 (110 Stat. 1452, 1457 (1996)). Taxpayers may appeal rejections of proposed installment agreements under section 7122(e), added to the Code by section 3462 of Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (RRA 98), Public Law 105-206 (112 Stat. 685, 764 (1998)). Section 6159(c), added to the Code by section 3467 of RRA 1998, requires the IRS to accept a proposed installment agreement for income taxes under certain circumstances. Section 3506 of RRA 1998 requires the IRS to send each taxpayer with an installment agreement an annual statement showing the balance due at the beginning of the year, the payments made during the year, and the remaining balance due at the end of the year.Section 843 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (AJCA), Public Law 108-357 (118 Stat. 1418, 1600 (2004)), amended section 6159(a) to allow the IRS to enter into installment agreements that provide for partial (as well as full) payment of a tax liability, but excludes partial payment installment agreements from the scope of installment agreements that must be accepted by the I RS. Section 843 of the AJCA also added new section 6159(d), requiring the IRS to review partial payment installment agreements every two years. The primary purpose of the review is to determine whether the financial condition of the taxpayer has significantly changed so as to warrant an increase in the value of the payments being made. See H. Rep. No. 108-755, 108th Cong., 2d Sess., 2005 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1341 (October 7, 2004).On March 5, 2007, a notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-100841-97; 72 FR 9712) was published in the Federal Register. The proposed regulations reflected the changes made to section 6159 by the Taxpayer Bill of Rights II, the RRA 98, and the AJCA. The proposed regulations reflected current IRS administrative practice. The IRS received one set of written comments with numerous recommendations. No public hearing was requested or held. After consideration of the comments, the proposed regulations are adopted as revised by this Treasury decision.Summary of Comments and Explanation of Revisions The final regulations adopt certain recommendations contained in the comments by clarifying two provisions of the proposed regulations. As explained in this preamble, §301.6159-1(e)(3) was amended to clarify that the taxpayer may submit a request to modify or terminate the installment agreement. Section 301.6159-1(e)(3) further clarifies that such a request will not suspend the statute of limitations on collection and the taxpayer must comply with the existing installment agreement while the request is being considered. As also explained in this preamble, §301.6159-1(e)(1)(i) clarifies that the IRS may terminate an installment agreement if the taxpayer provides materially incomplete or inaccurate information in response to an IRS request for a financial update.The following is a section-by-section analysis of the comments.Section 301.6159-1(b): Procedures for submission and consideration of proposed installment agreements.Section 301.6159-1(b) of the proposed regulations provided that an installment agreement request must be submitted according to procedures prescribed by the IRS. It did not require the IRS to accept or reject the request within a specific time frame. The commenter proposed to limit the IRS's time to consider an installment agreement to 90 days; if the IRS fails to act in that time, the agreement would be granted automatically. The commenter reasoned that the limited time frame would benefit the IRS because more installments agreements would be automatically allowed, thereby increasing revenues, and would benefit the taxpayer by allowing payments to begin quickly and efficiently. The recommendation was not adopted for two reasons. First, the IRS already grants installment agreements quickly and automatically in the vast majority of cases. If the taxpayer owes less than $25,000 and offers to pay the liabilities in full within 5 years, the agreement can be granted automatically under the IRS's “streamlined” installment agreement procedures. See Internal Revenue Manual 5.14.5.2 at http://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-014-005.html. The IRS granted over 2.62 million installment agreements in fiscal year 2008, of which over 2.51 million were granted through the IRS's streamlined procedures. In cases that do not meet the streamlined criteria, the IRS has determined that a more detailed review of the taxpayer's financial situation is warranted. Second, the IRS generally responds to nonstreamlined installment agreement requests in a timely manner. During the filing season, however, inventory fluctuations may cause delays. The automatic allowance of installment agreements in such cases would not be appropriate.Proposed § 301.6159-1(b)(2) provided that an installment agreement request becomes pending when it is accepted for processing. The commenter recommended that the IRS send an automatically-generated response acknowledging the date of acceptance for processing to the taxpayer and the taxpayer's representative. This recommendation was not adopted. The vast majority of installment agreements are streamlined agreements, which the IRS accepts very quickly. The IRS will, however, consider adopting an administrative procedure for the minority of cases where it anticipates a time lag between acceptance for processing and the acceptance or rejection of the installment agreement.Proposed §301.6159-1(b)(2) also provided that if an installment agreement request does not contain sufficient information to permit the IRS to evaluate whether the request should be accepted, the IRS will request the needed information. The commenter recommended that all requests for additional information should be reasonably necessary. The proposed regulations already address this recommendation by directing that requests be for “needed” information.Proposed §301.6159-1(b)(3) allowed a taxpayer to submit a good faith revision of a rejected installment agreement request within 30 days of rejection. The commenter recommended that the time for taxpayers to submit a good faith revision should be extended to 60 days because taxpayers often have difficulty obtaining the necessary documents within 30 days. This recommendation was not adopted. The recommendation would apply to a small number of installment agreement requests that are not accepted under the IRS's streamlined procedures. In these cases, the IRS requests the information necessary for a financial analysis before rejecting the installment agreement request. See Internal Revenue Manual 5.15.1.6 at http://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-015-001.html. Allowing 60 days following the rejection would encourage untimely responses and delay case resolution.Section 301.6159-1(c): Acceptance, form, and terms of installment agreements.Section 301.6159-1(c)(1) of the proposed regulations provided that an installment agreement request has not been accepted until the IRS notifies the taxpayer or the taxpayer's representative of the acceptance. Section 6159(a) requires that an installment agreement be in writing, and proposed §301.6159-1(c)(2) provided that the writing may take the form of a document signed by the taxpayer and the IRS or the written confirmation of an agreement entered into by the taxpayer and the IRS that is mailed or personally delivered to the taxpayer. The commenter recommended that the IRS's notification of the acceptance or rejection of a proposed installment agreement also be directed to the taxpayer's representative and include the terms of the agreement and payment submission information. These recommendations were not adopted in the regulations because they are more appropriately addressed in the IRS's procedures. The IRS currently does, however, provide written notification to the taxpayer and the taxpayer's representative of the acceptance or rejection of an installment agreement and the suggested information.The commenter was concerned that the IRS intended to change its streamlined procedures and recommended that the procedures be retained. The commenter was also concerned that proposed §301.6159-1(c)(3)(iii)(A) may represent a departure from the IRS's current policy that limits the acceptance of extensions of the collection statute of limitations in connection with installment agreements to the narrow subset of partial payment installment agreements in which the liability will not be paid in full under the agreement before the collection statute expires. As stated in the preamble to the notice of proposed rulemaking, the regulations were intended to reflect existing practices. The regulations will have no effect on the IRS's streamlined procedures or its policy with regard to waivers of the collection statute.The commenter stated that the proposed regulations did not explain the inclusion of §301.6159-1(c)(3)(ii), which provided that an installment agreement may, by its terms, end upon the expiration of the period of limitations on collection, or at some prior date. As explained in the preamble to the proposed regulations, this provision clarifies that the IRS may enter into partial payment installment agreements that end upon the running of the collection statute, or that end prior to that time so that the IRS may collect the balance of the tax liability against any property belonging to the taxpayer before the collection period expires. The IRS does not currently enter into partial payment installment agreements that expire before the end of the collection statute and has no plans to do so routinely in the future.Proposed §301.6159-1(c)(3)(v) provided that while an installment agreement is in effect, the IRS may request a financial condition update from the taxpayer at any time. The commenter recommended that the IRS be permitted to request only one financial condition update per year. This recommendation was not adopted. The IRS very rarely requests updates more than once a year. In certain rare circumstances, more frequent updates may be appropriate, such as when the IRS has reason to believe that the taxpayer's financial condition has improved.Section 301.6159-1(d): Rejection of a proposed installment agreement.Section 301.6159-1(d)(2) of the proposed regulations provided that the IRS may not notify a taxpayer or the taxpayer's representative of the rejection of an installment agreement until an independent review of proposed rejection is completed. The commenter was concerned that the proposed regulations did not provide any guidance as to how the independent administrative review will be assured. The commenter recommended that the review be undertaken by an IRS office located in a different territory. The recommendation was not adopted. Managers in the IRS offices in San Jose, California, and Jacksonville, Florida, supervise employees throughout the United States who review rejected installment agreements. An independent review is assured by assigning these cases to an employee who has no prior involvement in the case and who reports to a supervisor in either of these two offices.The commenter recommended that the determination that the taxpayer did not submit a good faith revision be subject to independent administrative review. This recommendation was not adopted because it would delay case resolution and would, in effect, treat requests that were not made in good faith as valid requests. The commenter also recommended that the rejection of revisions that were made in good faith receive independent review. The proposed regulation already provided for this review. Proposed §301.6159-1(b) stated that if the IRS determines that the taxpayer made a good faith revision within 30 days of the rejection, the provisions of §301.6159-1 apply to the revised proposal.Proposed §301.6159-1(d)(3) provided that a taxpayer may appeal the rejection of an installment agreement request within 30 days of the rejection. The commenter recommended that the 30-day period be tolled while a revised proposal of a rejected request is being evaluated so that the taxpayer would not have to file an appeal while the revision is under consideration. This recommendation was not adopted. The IRS's procedures are designed to allow a quick resolution of the taxpayer's request; tolling the appeal period would add an unneeded layer of complexity to the process and delay case resolution. The commenter also recommended that the IRS provide more definitive guidance as to what qualifies as a good faith revision. This recommendation was not adopted because this guidance is more appropriately left to the IRS procedures.Section 301.6159-1(e): Modification or termination of installment agreements by the Internal Revenue Service.Proposed §301.6159-1(e)(2)(i) provided that the IRS may modify or terminate an installment agreement if the IRS determines that the financial condition of the taxpayer has significantly changed. Proposed §301.6159-1(c)(3)(vi) provided that the IRS and the taxpayer may agree to modify or terminate an installment agreement or may agree to a new installment agreement that supersedes the existing agreement. The commenter recommended that the regulations explicitly allow taxpayers to request a modification or termination of an existing installment agreement, as was stated in existing §301.6159-1(c)(3). This clarification was adopted in §301.6159-1(e)(3).The commenter recommended that the regulations require the taxpayer to comply with the terms of an installment agreement while a request for modification is being considered and that a proposed modification will not result in a suspension of the statute of limitations on collection. These clarifications were also adopted in §301.6159-1(e)(3).The commenter recommended that a taxpayer's request to modify an existing installment agreement should be exempt from user fees under regulations §§300.1 and 300.2. This recommendation was not adopted because user fees are outside the scope of this regulation project.Proposed §301.6159-1(e)(2)(ii)(C) provided that the IRS may modify or terminate an installment agreement if the taxpayer fails to provide a financial condition update requested by the IRS. The commenter recommended that the regulations provide explicitly whether the IRS may terminate an installment agreement if the taxpayer provided materially inaccurate or incomplete information. This recommendation was adopted. Section 301.6159-1(e)(1)(i) was revised to clarify that the IRS may terminate an installment agreement if the taxpayer provided materially inaccurate or incomplete information in connection with a requested financial update.Proposed §301.6159-1(e)(3) provided that the IRS will generally notify the taxpayer in writing at least 30 days prior to terminating an installment agreement and describe the reason for the termination, after which the taxpayer may provide information showing that the IRS's reason is incorrect. Proposed §301.6159-1(e)(4) provided for the administrative appeal of the modification or termination of an installment agreement to the Office of Appeals if the request is properly made within 30 days after the termination or modification is to take effect. The commenter recommended that the regulations clarify that an appeal should be made to the Office of Appeals within 30 days after the modification or termination will take effect, regardless of whether the taxpayer submits additional information under §301.6159-1(e)(3), has filled out Form 9423, “Collection Appeal Request,” or has requested a meeting with a Collection Manager. This recommendation was not adopted in the regulations because it is more appropriately addressed in IRS forms and procedures.Proposed §301.6159-1(e)(4) provided, in part, that the taxpayer may administratively appeal the modification or termination of an installment agreement to the Office of Appeals. The commenter recommended that the taxpayer be allowed to appeal the IRS's determination not to modify an installment agreement. This recommendation was not adopted. The IRS routinely grants taxpayer modification requests that result in agreements within the streamlined criteria. See Internal Revenue Manual 5.19.1.5.4.24 at http://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-019-001.html. Taxpayers do not have a statutory right to appeal rejected modification requests, and the IRS has not determined there is a need for additional administrative review of the denial of a modification request.Section 301.6159-1(f): Effect of installment agreement or pending installment agreement on collection activity.Section 301.6159-1(f)(1) of the proposed regulations stated that the IRS may not levy during the time an installment agreement is pending. Proposed §301.6159-1(f)(2) stated that levy is not prohibited if an installment agreement request was made solely to delay collection. The commenter recommended that the solely to delay collection standard in the proposed regulations be replaced with language that references the “frivolous submission” standard in section 6702(b) of the Code. This recommendation was not adopted. Under existing IRS procedures, an installment agreement is returned as made solely to delay collection when there is no economic reality to the request, the request fails to address changes previously requested by the IRS in response to a prior request, the request ignores direction provided by revenue officers, the request is made by a taxpayer that has defaulted prior installment agreements, or the request is made at a time that causes it to be classified as a request made to delay enforcement action. See Internal Revenue Manual 5.14.3.2 at http://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-014-003.html. Section 6702(b) imposes a $5,000 penalty for installment agreement requests that reflect a desire to delay or impede the administration of the Federal tax laws, and the IRS has not yet developed procedures defining the kinds of installment agreements that constitute frivolous submissions. The standard in section 6702(b) therefore may not be an appropriate standard for identifying those installment agreements that fail to qualify for the prohibition against levy.In the alternative, the commenter recommended that the regulations state that a taxpayer may appeal the IRS's levy action when the IRS determines that an installment agreement request was made solely to delay collection, and that damages may be appropriate under section 7433 of the Code. These recommendations were not adopted. Taxpayers' rights to appeal proposed levies and seek damages are provided for in the regulations under sections 6330 and 7433 of the Code, respectively.Section 301.6159-1(g): Suspension of the statute of limitations on collection.Section 301.6159-1(g) of the proposed regulations provided that the statute of limitations on collection under section 6502 of the Code is suspended for the period that a proposed installment agreement is pending, plus 30 days following a rejection, and during any appeal. The commenter recommended that the regulations clearly define when an installment agreement is pending. This recommendation is already addressed by proposed §301.6159-1(b)(2), which provides a detailed explanation of when an installment agreement is pending.Section 301.6159-1(h): Annual statement.Section 301.6159-1(h) of the proposed regulations requires the IRS to provide taxpayers with an annual statement setting forth the balance owed at the beginning of the year, the payments made during the year, and the remaining balance at the end of the year. The commenter recommends that the annual statement be as clear as possible and that the IRS provide the taxpayer with a single annual statement describing all tax liabilities covered by the agreement. Currently, the IRS sends an annual statement for each separate liability covered by an installment agreement. No change was made to the final regulations because this recommendation is more appropriately addressed when the IRS updates the forms used for the annual statements.Section 301.6159-1(i): Biennial review of partial payment installment agreements.Section 301.6159-1(i) of the proposed regulations required the IRS to perform a review of the taxpayer's financial condition at least once every two years in cases of partial payment installment agreements. The proposed regulations also stated that the purpose of the review was to determine whether an increase in payments is warranted. The commenter recommended that §301.6159-1(i) be rephrased to provide that the biennial review of a taxpayer's financial condition may result in a decrease, as well as an increase, in the amount of payments being made. This recommendation was not adopted. While taxpayers may request a decrease in the amount of payments due under an installment agreement, the IRS does not have the information to unilaterally make that determination. The automatic biennial review done by the IRS does not, in every case, result in a request for updated financial information. As explained above, taxpayers may request that their payments be lowered if their financial condition has worsened.Section 301.6159-1(k): Effective/applicability date.Section 301.6159-1(k) of the proposed regulations provided that the effective date of the final regulations would be the date the final regulations are published in the Federal Register. The commenter was concerned about how previously proposed or accepted installment agreements will be affected by the regulations and recommended that the effective date of paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) apply prospectively. This recommendation was not adopted. As explained earlier and in the preamble to the proposed regulations, the regulations substantially reflect existing practices. The regulations will therefore have no effect on previously proposed or accepted installment agreements.Special Analyses It has been determined that this Treasury decision is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It also has been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations, and because the regulations do not impose a collection of information on small entities, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, the proposed regulations preceding these regulations were submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business.Drafting Information The principal author of these regulations is Walter Ryan, Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration).List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 301 Employment taxes, Estate taxes, Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.Adoption of Amendments to the Regulations Accordingly, 26 CFR part 301 is amended as follows:PART 301—PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATIONParagraph 1. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read in part as follows:Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * * Par. 2. Section 301.6159-0 is added to read as follows:§301.6159-0 Table of contents.This section lists the major captions that appear in the regulations under §301.6159-1.§301.6159-1 Agreements for the payment of tax liabilities in installments.(a) Authority.(b) Procedures for submission and consideration of proposed installment agreements.(c) Acceptance, form, and terms of installment agreements.(d) Rejection of a proposed installment agreement.(e) Modification or termination of installment agreements by the Internal Revenue Service.(f) Effect of installment agreement or pending installment agreement on collection activity.(g) Suspension of the statute of limitations on collection.(h) Annual statement.(i) Biennial review of partial payment installment agreements.(j) Cross reference.(k) Effective/applicability date.Par. 3. Section 301.6159-1 is revised to read as follows:§301.6159-1 Agreements for payment of tax liabilities in installments.(a) Authority. The Commissioner may enter into a written agreement with a taxpayer that allows the taxpayer to make scheduled periodic payments of any tax liability if the Commissioner determines that such agreement will facilitate full or partial collection of the tax liability.(b) Procedures for submission and consideration of proposed installment agreements—(1) In general. A proposed installment agreement must be submitted according to the procedures, and in the form and manner, prescribed by the Commissioner.(2) When a proposed installment agreement becomes pending. A proposed installment agreement becomes pending when it is accepted for processing. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) may not accept a proposed installment agreement for processing following reference of a case involving the liability that is the subject of the proposed installment agreement to the Department of Justice for prosecution or defense. The proposed installment agreement remains pending until the IRS accepts the proposal, the IRS notifies the taxpayer that the proposal has been rejected, or the proposal is withdrawn by the taxpayer. If a proposed installment agreement that has been accepted for processing does not contain sufficient information to permit the IRS to evaluate whether the proposal should be accepted, the IRS will request the taxpayer to provide the needed additional information. If the taxpayer does not submit the additional information that the IRS has requested within a reasonable time period after such a request, the IRS may reject the proposed installment agreement.(3) Revised proposals of installment agreements submitted following rejection. If, following the rejection of a proposed installment agreement, the IRS determines that the taxpayer made a good faith revision of the proposal and submitted the revision within 30 days of the date of rejection, the provisions of this section shall apply to that revised proposal. If, however, the IRS determines that a revision was not made in good faith, the provisions of this section do not apply to the revision and the appeal period in paragraph (d)(3) of this section continues to run from the date of the original rejection.(c) Acceptance, form, and terms of installment agreements—(1) Acceptance of an installment agreement—(i) In general. A proposed installment agreement has not been accepted until the IRS notifies the taxpayer or the taxpayer's representative of the acceptance. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section, the Commissioner has the discretion to accept or reject any proposed installment agreement.(ii) Acceptance does not reduce liabilities. The acceptance of an installment agreement by the IRS does not reduce the amount of taxes, interest, or penalties owed. (However, penalties may continue to accrue at a reduced rate pursuant to section 6651(h).)(iii) Guaranteed installment agreements. In the case of a liability of an individual for income tax, the Commissioner shall accept a proposed installment agreement if, as of the date the individual proposes the installment agreement—(A) The aggregate amount of the liability (not including interest, penalties, additions to tax, and additional amounts) does not exceed $10,000;(B) The taxpayer (and, if the liability relates to a joint return, the taxpayer's spouse) has not, during any of the preceding five taxable years—( 1) Failed to file any income tax return;( 2) Failed to pay any required income tax; or( 3) Entered into an installment agreement for the payment of any income tax;(C) The Commissioner determines that the taxpayer is financially unable to pay the liability in full when due (and the taxpayer submits any information the Commissioner requires to make that determination);(D) The installment agreement requires full payment of the liability within three years; and(E) The taxpayer agrees to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code for the period the agreement is in effect.(2) Form of installment agreements. An installment agreement must be in writing. A written installment agreement may take the form of a document signed by the taxpayer and the Commissioner or a written confirmation of an agreement entered into by the taxpayer and the Commissioner that is mailed or personally delivered to the taxpayer.(3) Terms of installment agreements. (i) Except as otherwise provided in this section, an installment agreement is effective from the date the IRS notifies the taxpayer or the taxpayer's representative of its acceptance until the date the agreement ends by its terms or until it is superseded by a new installment agreement.(ii) By its terms, an installment agreement may end upon the expiration of the period of limitations on collection in section 6502 and §301.6502-1, or at some prior date.(iii) As a condition to entering into an installment agreement with a taxpayer, the Commissioner may require that—(A) The taxpayer agree to a reasonable extension of the period of limitations on collection; and(B) The agreement contain terms that protect the interests of the Government.(iv) Except as otherwise provided in an installment agreement, all payments made under the installment agreement will be applied in the best interests of the Government.(v) While an installment agreement is in effect, the Commissioner may request, and the taxpayer must provide, a financial condition update at any time.(vi) At any time after entering into an installment agreement, the Commissioner and the taxpayer may agree to modify or terminate an installment agreement or may agree to a new installment agreement that supersedes the existing agreement.(d) Rejection of a proposed installment agreement—(1) When a proposed installment agreement becomes rejected. A proposed installment agreement has not been rejected until the IRS notifies the taxpayer or the taxpayer's representative of the rejection, the reason(s) for rejection, and the right to an appeal.(2) Independent administrative review. The IRS may not notify a taxpayer or taxpayer's representative of the rejection of an installment agreement until an independent administrative review of the proposed rejection is completed.(3) Appeal of rejection of a proposed installment agreement. The taxpayer may administratively appeal a rejection of a proposed installment agreement to the IRS Office of Appeals (Appeals) if, within the 30-day period commencing the day after the taxpayer is notified of the rejection, the taxpayer requests an appeal in the manner provided by the Commissioner.(e) Modification or termination of installment agreements by the Internal Revenue Service—(1) Inadequate information or jeopardy. The Commissioner may terminate an installment agreement if the Commissioner determines that—(i) Information which was provided to the IRS by the taxpayer or the taxpayer's representative in connection with either the granting of the installment agreement or a request for a financial update was inaccurate or incomplete in any material respect; or(ii) Collection of any liability to which the installment agreement applies is in jeopardy.(2) Change in financial condition, failure to timely pay an installment or another Federal tax liability, or failure to provide requested financial information. The Commissioner may modify or terminate an installment agreement if—(i) The Commissioner determines that the financial condition of a taxpayer that is party to the agreement has significantly changed; or(ii) A taxpayer that is party to the installment agreement fails to—(A) Timely pay an installment in accordance with the terms of the installment agreement;(B) Pay any other Federal tax liability when the liability becomes due; or(C) Provide a financial condition update requested by the Commissioner.(3) Request by taxpayer. Upon request by a taxpayer that is a party to the installment agreement, the Commissioner may terminate or modify the terms of an installment agreement if the Commissioner determines that the financial condition of the taxpayer has significantly changed. The taxpayer's request will not suspend the statute of limitations under section 6502 for collection of any liability. While the Commissioner is considering the request, the taxpayer shall comply with the terms of the existing installment agreement.(4) Notice. Unless the Commissioner determines that collection of the tax is in jeopardy, the Commissioner will notify the taxpayer in writing at least 30 days prior to modifying or terminating an installment agreement pursuant to paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section. The notice provided pursuant to this section must briefly describe the reason for the intended modification or termination. Upon receiving notice, the taxpayer may provide information showing that the reason for the proposed modification or termination is incorrect.(5) Appeal of modification or termination of an installment agreement. The taxpayer may administratively appeal the modification or termination of an installment agreement to Appeals if, following issuance of the notice required by paragraph (e)(4) of this section and prior to the expiration of the 30-day period commencing the day after the modification or termination is to take effect, the taxpayer requests an appeal in the manner provided by the Commissioner.(f) Effect of installment agreement or pending installment agreement on collection activity—(1) In general. No levy may be made to collect a tax liability that is the subject of an installment agreement during the period that a proposed installment agreement is pending with the IRS, for 30 days immediately following the rejection of a proposed installment agreement, during the period that an installment agreement is in effect, and for 30 days immediately following the termination of an installment agreement. If, prior to the expiration of the 30-day period following the rejection or termination of an installment agreement, the taxpayer appeals the rejection or termination decision, no levy may be made while the rejection or termination is being considered by Appeals. This section will not prohibit levy to collect the liability of any person other than the person or persons named in the installment agreement.(2) Exceptions. Paragraph (f)(1) of this section shall not prohibit levy if the taxpayer files a written notice with the IRS that waives the restriction on levy imposed by this section, the IRS determines that the proposed installment agreement was submitted solely to delay collection, or the IRS determines that collection of the tax to which the installment agreement or proposed installment agreement relates is in jeopardy.(3) Other actions by the IRS while levy is prohibited—(i) In general. The IRS may take actions other than levy to protect the interests of the Government with regard to the liability identified in an installment agreement or proposed installment agreement. Those actions include, for example—(A) Crediting an overpayment against the liability pursuant to section 6402;(B) Filing or refiling notices of Federal tax lien; and(C) Taking action to collect from any person who is not named in the installment agreement or proposed installment agreement but who is liable for the tax to which the installment agreement relates.(ii) Proceedings in court. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (f)(3)(ii), the IRS will not refer a case to the Department of Justice for the commencement of a proceeding in court, against a person named in an installment agreement or proposed installment agreement, if levy to collect the liability is prohibited by paragraph (f)(1) of this section. Without regard to whether a person is named in an installment agreement or proposed installment agreement, however, the IRS may authorize the Department of Justice to file a counterclaim or third-party complaint in a refund action or to join that person in any other proceeding in which liability for the tax that is the subject of the installment agreement or proposed installment agreement may be established or disputed, including a suit against the United States under 28 U.S.C. 2410. In addition, the United States may file a claim in any bankruptcy proceeding or insolvency action brought by or against such person. If a person named in an installment agreement is joined in a proceeding, the United States obtains a judgment against that person, and the case is referred back to the IRS for collection, collection will continue to occur pursuant to the terms of the installment agreement. Notwithstanding the installment agreement, any claim or suit permitted will be for the full amount of the liabilities owed.(g) Suspension of the statute of limitations on collection. The statute of limitations under section 6502 for collection of any liability shall be suspended during the period that a proposed installment agreement relating to that liability is pending with the IRS, for 30 days immediately following the rejection of a proposed installment agreement, and for 30 days immediately following the termination of an installment agreement. If, within the 30 days following the rejection or termination of an installment agreement, the taxpayer files an appeal with Appeals, the statute of limitations for collection shall be suspended while the rejection or termination is being considered by Appeals. The statute of limitations for collection shall continue to run if an exception under paragraph (f)(2) of this section applies and levy is not prohibited with respect to the taxpayer.(h) Annual statement. The Commissioner shall provide each taxpayer who is party to an installment agreement under this section with an annual statement setting forth the initial balance owed at the beginning of the year, the payments made during the year, and the remaining balance as of the end of the year.(i) Biennial review of partial payment installment agreements. The Commissioner shall perform a review of the taxpayer's financial condition in the case of a partial payment installment agreement at least once every two years. The purpose of this review is to determine whether the taxpayer's financial condition has significantly changed so as to warrant an increase in the value of the payments being made or termination of the agreement.(j) Cross reference. Pursuant to section 6601(b)(1), the last day prescribed for payment is determined without regard to any installment agreement, including for purposes of computing penalties and interest provided by the Internal Revenue Code. For special rules regarding the computation of the failure to pay penalty while certain installment agreements are in effect, see section 6651(h) and §301.6651-1(a)(4).(k) Effective/applicability date. This section is applicable on [ INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].Par. 4. Section 301.6331-4, paragraph (d) is revised and paragraph (e) is added to read as follows:§301.6331-4 Restrictions on levy while installment agreements are pending or in effect.* * * * *(d) Cross-reference. For provisions relating to the making of levies while an installment agreement is pending or in effect, see §301.6159-1.(e) Effective /applicability date. Paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) are applicable beginning December 18, 2002. Paragraph (d) is applicable beginning [ INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].Steven T. MillerDeputy Commissioner of Services and Enforcement.Approved: November 11, 2009Michael F. MundacaActing Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy).
Part pay Installment Agreement Regulations
Wayne Robert Risley and Nanette Risley v. Commissioner., U.S. Tax Court, T.C. Summary Opinion 2009-172, (Nov. 23, 2009)Docket No. 10857-05S. Filed November 23, 2009.A married couple who participated in a fraudulent tax shelter was not entitled to the claimed business expense deductions or disabled access credits for any of the tax years at issue. The IRS was not equitably estopped from assessing deficiencies against them. The couple failed to prove that the IRS made any representations to them regarding the tax shelter. In fact, the IRS had no contact with the couple before the returns claiming the dubious expenses and credits were filed. Since the couple invested in the tax shelter separate and apart from any advice from the IRS, equitable estoppel did not apply. In addition, the promoter’s statements regarding the validity of the tax shelter were not imputed to the IRS even though the promoter advertised that it employed enrolled agents and former IRS employees. The IRS was not estopped from challenging the tax shelter merely because an enrolled agent or former IRS employee was affiliated with it. Moreover, the couple was not entitled to deduct their investment in the tax shelter as a theft loss under Code Sec. 165 because they failed to establish that they discovered the "theft" during any of the tax years at issue. Finally, the accuracy-related penalty for negligence was imposed because the couple failed to show that they had reasonable cause or acted in good-faith. The couple could not rely on the tax shelter’s alleged preparation of their returns to show reasonable reliance of a tax professional. Not only did the couple prepare their own returns for two of the tax years at issue, but the tax shelter informed the couple that it was not providing them with legal or tax advice. Moreover, any reliance on the tax shelter promoter would be per se unreasonable.PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.Robert L. Risley, for petitioners; Kevin W. Coy and Kelly R. Morrison-Lee, for respondent. LARO, Judge: Petitioners petitioned the Court to redetermine respondent's determination of deficiencies in and accuracy-related penalties related to their joint 2001, 2002, and 2003 Federal income tax returns (2001 return, 2002 return, and 2003 return, respectively; collectively, subject returns). Petitioners filed their petition pursuant to the provisions of section 7463. 1 This case is now before the Court on respondent's motion for summary judgment. We hold that respondent is entitled to summary judgment and shall enter a decision accordingly. Pursuant to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case.Background I. Preliminaries Petitioners are husband and wife. They resided in California when their petition was filed. They filed the subject returns jointly.II. Tax Shelter Petitioners participated in a fraudulent tax shelter (tax shelter) promoted and sold by the National Audit Defense Network (NADN). The NADN advertised itself as a conglomerate of former Internal Revenue Service agents, enrolled agents, certified public accountants, and tax attorneys who could help U.S. taxpayers pay no Federal income tax. The NADN informed petitioners that they could qualify for significant tax benefits by forming a Web site and then paying the NADN to modify the Website to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Pub. L. 101-336, sec. 302(a), 104 Stat. 355, codified at 42 U.S.C. sec. 12182(a) (2006). The ADA generally provides that any person who owns, leases, or operates a place of public accommodation shall not discriminate against disabled individuals in the full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of the place of public accommodation.The NADN informed petitioners that they had to pay the NADN $2,495 and issue to the NADN a $7,980 promissory note as to each year in which they wanted to participate in the tax shelter. Payments on a note were to be made from the revenue generated by the Web site or, if no revenue was generated, 8 years after the note's making. The NADN informed petitioners that they could claim a $5,000 tax credit pursuant to section 44 and deduct at least $5,475 of business expenses pursuant to section 162 for each year that they participated in the tax shelter. The NADN advised petitioners that it was not providing them (nor was it engaged in the rendering of) any legal, accounting, or other professional service and that they should retain a “competent professional” if they wanted any legal advice or other expert assistance with respect to the tax shelter.Petitioners paid the NADN $2,495 in each subject year to participate in the tax shelter. Petitioners also signed at least one $7,980 promissory note payable to the NADN or to an affiliate thereof.III. Subject Returns A. 2001 Return Petitioners prepared their 2001 return themselves. Petitioners attached a 2001 Schedule C, Profit or Loss From Business (Sole Proprietorship), to their 2001 return reporting that petitioner Wayne R. Risley (Mr. Risley) operated an “Electronic Shipping and Information Service” business during 2001. The only item of income or expense reported on the 2001 Schedule C was a $5,475 expense identified as “Excess expenditures for modifications made for disabled access to business”. Petitioners also attached a 2001 Form 8826, Disabled Access Credit, to their 2001 return. The 2001 Form 8826 reported that petitioners paid $10,475 in total eligible access expenditures during 2001 and were claiming a $5,000 disabled access credit for 2001. Petitioners claimed the $5,000 credit on their 2001 return.B. 2002 Return Petitioners prepared their 2002 return themselves. Petitioners attached a 2002 Schedule C to their 2002 return reporting that Mr. Risley operated an “Apple Electronic Shopping & Information” business during 2002. The only item of income or expense reported on the 2002 Schedule C was a $5,475 expense identified as “Excess expenditures for modifications made for [sic]”. Petitioners also attached a 2002 Form 8826 to their 2002 return. The 2002 Form 8826 reported that petitioners paid $10,475 in total eligible access expenditures during 2002, that petitioners had a current year disabled access credit of $5,000, and that petitioners were claiming $611 of the $5,000 as an allowable disabled access credit for 2002. Petitioners claimed the $611 credit on their 2002 return.C. 2003 Return Petitioners' 2003 return was prepared by H&R Block. Petitioners' 2003 return did not report any income or deductions as to the tax shelter. Petitioners attached a 2003 Form 8826 to their 2003 return. The 2003 Form 8826 reported that petitioners paid $5,000 in total eligible access expenditures during 2003 and that petitioners were claiming a $2,375 disabled access credit for 2003. Petitioners claimed the $2,375 credit on their 2003 return.IV. Notice of Deficiency Respondent issued petitioners a notice of deficiency as to the subject returns. Respondent determined in the notice of deficiency that petitioners were not entitled to any of the deductions or credits claimed as to the tax shelter. For the respective years, respondent determined deficiencies of $6,513, $2,776, and $2,712. 2 Respondent also determined accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a) and (b) of $1,303, $555, and $542, respectively, for negligence or disregard of rules and regulations.Discussion I. Standard for Summary Judgment Summary judgment may be granted with respect to any part of the legal issues in controversy if the record before the Court shows no genuine issue as to any material fact and that a decision may be rendered as a matter of law. See Rule 121(a) and (b); Craig v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 252, 259-260 (2002). Respondent bears the burden of proving the absence of any genuine issue of material fact, and all facts are viewed in the light most favorable to petitioners. See Craig v. Commissioner, supra at 260. Petitioners, however, must do more than merely allege or deny facts; they must set forth “specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.” See Rule 121(d); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324 (1986). Petitioners have failed to raise any genuine issue of material fact under that standard, and this case is ripe for summary judgment.II. Deficiencies Petitioners make no claim that sections 44 and 162 actually allow them to deduct or credit the items that they reported as to the tax shelter. Cf. Good v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2008-245 (holding on the merits that the taxpayers were not entitled to the section 162 expenses and disabled business credits reported as to the tax shelter). Petitioners' primary argument in challenging respondent's determination of the deficiencies is that respondent is equitably estopped from assessing against them any amount relating to the tax shelter. We disagree. Equitable estoppel is a judicial doctrine that precludes a party from denying his or her acts or representations which induced another to act to his or her detriment. See Hofstetter v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 695, 700 (1992). The following requirements must be satisfied where, as here, equitable estoppel is asserted against the Commissioner: (1) A false representation by the Commissioner or his wrongful, misleading silence; (2) an error in a statement of fact and not in an opinion or statement of law; (3) ignorance of the true facts; (4) a taxpayer's reasonable reliance on the Commissioner's acts or statements; and (5) adverse effects of the Commissioner's acts or statement. See Norfolk S. Corp. v. Commissioner, 104 T.C. 13, 59-60 (1995), affd. 140 F.3d 240 (4th Cir. 1998). Petitioners' failure to establish any one of these five requirements means that their claim of equitable estopped must fail as well.Petitioners have failed to establish on the part of respondent either a false representation or a wrongful, misleading silence as to the tax shelter. 3 To that end, we are unable to find as to the tax shelter that respondent made any representation (let alone any misrepresentation) to petitioners or otherwise wrongfully concealed from petitioners any material fact. Instead, the record establishes (and we so find) that respondent had no contact with petitioners as to the tax shelter before his audit of the subject returns and that petitioners invested in the tax shelter separate and apart from any action taken by respondent.Petitioners argue that the statements of the the NADN's workforce are imputed to respondent to the extent that those workers were registered with the Internal Revenue Service as enrolled agents or tax preparers. Petitioners also argue that the tax shelter is imputed to respondent because the NADN advertised that it employed those workers as well as former Internal Revenue Service employees. We disagree on both counts. The record does not establish, nor do petitioners claim, that any of the NADN's workers also were working for the Internal Revenue Service at the same time. Moreover, the mere fact that a former employee of the Internal Revenue Service, or an individual registered with the Internal Revenue Service as an enrolled agent or a tax preparer, may have been affiliated with the NADN (and/or the tax shelter) does not estop respondent from challenging the legitimacy of the tax shelter. See Auto. Club of Mich. v. Commissioner, 353 U.S. 180, 183-184 (1957) (holding that the Commissioner is usually not estopped from correcting retroactively a mistake of law); see also Martin's Auto Trimming, Inc. v. Riddell, 283 F.2d 503, 506 (9th Cir. 1960); Schwalbach v. Commissioner, 111 T.C. 215, 228 n.4 (1998); Fortugno v. Commissioner, 41 T.C. 316, 323-324 (1963), affd. 353 F.2d 429 (3d Cir. 1965). Nor do we believe, as petitioners argued, that respondent was sufficiently aware of the impropriety of the tax shelter through petitioners' filing of their 2001 return so that he is estopped from challenging any of the amounts that petitioners later claimed as to the tax shelters for 2002 and 2003.Petitioners also argue that the Government should bear the loss of any Federal income taxes owed by them as to the tax shelter because respondent failed to inform petitioners that the tax shelter was a “fraud” and is in a better position than they to recover the $7,485 that they paid to the NADN. We disagree. While petitioners consider it inequitable that they have to pay taxes as to the tax shelter when they have paid $7,485 to the NADN for what they now consider to be a worthless investment, we know of no reason the Government should act as an insurer of that investment. Nor do we agree with petitioners that they are entitled for the subject years to deduct the $7,485 as a theft loss under section 165. While section 165 lets an individual deduct a theft loss in the year during which the individual discovers the loss, see sec. 165(a), (c)(3), (e), the record does not establish that petitioners discovered any such theft loss during the subject years.We hold that respondent is not estopped from disallowing the claimed amounts. Accordingly, we sustain respondent's determination of the deficiencies.III. Accuracy-Related Penalties Respondent determined that petitioners are liable for accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a) and (b)(1). Section 6662(a) and (b)(1) imposes a penalty equal to 20 percent of the portion of an underpayment of tax attributable to a taxpayer's negligence or disregard of rules or regulations. Negligence connotes a lack of due care or failure to do what a reasonable and prudent person would do under the circumstances. See Allen v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 1, 12 (1989), affd. 925 F.2d 348 (9th Cir. 1991). An accuracy-related penalty is not applicable to any portion of an underpayment to the extent that the taxpayer had reasonable cause for that portion and acted in good faith with respect thereto. See sec. 6664(c)(1).Respondent bears the burden of production with respect to the applicability of the accuracy-related penalties. See sec. 7491(c). That burden requires that respondent produce sufficient evidence that it is appropriate to impose the accuracy-related penalties. See Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438, 446 (2001). Once respondent meets this burden, the burden of proof falls upon petitioners. See id. at 447. Petitioners may carry their burden by proving that they were not negligent; i.e., that they made a reasonable attempt to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and were not careless, reckless, or in intentional disregard of rules or regulations. See sec. 6662(c). Alternatively, petitioners may establish that their underpayment was attributable to reasonable cause and their acting in good faith. See sec. 6664(c)(1).We conclude that respondent has met his burden of production and that petitioners have failed to carry their burden of proof. The record establishes that petitioners claimed significant amounts of tax benefits to which they neither were entitled nor had a reasonable claim. The record does not establish that petitioners made a reasonable attempt to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, that petitioners' underpayment was attributable to reasonable cause, or that petitioners acted in good faith as to the underpayment. Petitioners claim that the subject returns were prepared and reviewed by the NADN and that they reasonably relied on the NADN to prepare those returns correctly. We reject that claim as factually and legally incorrect. As a point of fact, petitioners prepared their 2001 and 2002 returns themselves; H&R Block prepared their 2003 return; and the NADN informed petitioners that it was not providing them with any legal or other professional service and that they should retain a competent professional if they wanted any legal advice or other expert assistance with respect to the tax shelter. As a point of law, any such claimed reliance upon the NADN (if it in fact had occurred) would not be reasonable in the setting of this case given that the NADN was the tax shelter's promoter. See Neonatology Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 43, 98-99 (2000), affd. 299 F.3d 221 (3d Cir. 2002).We hold that petitioners are liable for the accuracy-related penalties respondent determined. Accordingly, we sustain respondent's determination as to those penalties.IV. Conclusion We have considered all of petitioners' contentions and have concluded that those contentions not discussed herein are without merit. To reflect the foregoing,An appropriate order and decision will be entered for respondent.Footnotes 1Section references are to the applicable versions of the Internal Revenue Code. Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.2These deficiencies total $11,664, and petitioners' cash expenditures as to the tax shelter total $7,485 ($2,495 × 3). Petitioners reportedly realized an economic gain of $4,179 from the tax shelter ($11,664—$7,485 = $4,179).3Given this failure, we need not and do not address any of the other four requirements of equitable estoppel.
negligence penalt case
Amendments of Reg. §301.6501(c)-1, relating to the exception to the general three-year period of limitations on assessment under Code Sec. 6501(c)(10) for listed transactions that a taxpayer failed to disclose as required under Code Sec. 6011, are proposed. Proposed Amendments of Regulations, NPRM REG-160871-04, published in the Federal Register on, October 7, 2009. AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.SUMMARY: This document contains proposed regulations relating to the exception to the general three-year period of limitations on assessment under section 6501(c)(10) of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) for listed transactions that a taxpayer failed to disclose as required under section 6011. These regulations will affect taxpayers who fail to disclose listed transactions in accordance with section 6011.DATES: Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by [ INSERT DATE THAT IS 90 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. ADDRESSES: Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-160871-04), room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P. O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-160871-04), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC, or sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-160871-04).FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning the proposed regulations, Audra M. Dineen at (202) 622-4910; concerning submissions of comments and requests for a public hearing, Oluwafunmilayo Taylor of the Publications and Regulations Branch at (202) 622-7180 (not toll-free numbers).SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Paperwork Reduction Act The collection of information contained in this notice of proposed rulemaking has been reviewed and approved by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) under control number 1545-1940. The collection of information in these proposed regulations is in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5). This information is required to provide the IRS, under penalties of perjury, with the information necessary to properly determine the taxpayer's applicable period of limitations. The collection of information in these proposed regulations is the same as the collection of information in Revenue Procedure 2005-26 (2005-1 CB 965), which was previously reviewed and approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1545-1940. The collection of information in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(6) is the same as the collection of information required under section 6112. See § 601.601(d)(2)(ii)(b).An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget.Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. § 6103.Background This document contains proposed amendments to the Procedure and Administration Regulations (26 CFR Part 301) under section 6501(c) relating to exceptions to the period of limitations on assessment. Section 6501(a) provides that, except as otherwise provided, if a return is filed, tax with respect to that return must be assessed within 3 years from the later of the date the return was filed or the original due date of the return. Section 6501(c) contains several exceptions to the general threeyear period of limitations on assessment.Section 6501(c)(10) was added to the Code by section 814 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, Public Law 108-357 (118 Stat. 1418, 1581 (2004)) (AJCA), enacted on October 22, 2004. Section 6501(c)(10) provides that, if a taxpayer fails to disclose a listed transaction as required under section 6011, the time to assess tax against the taxpayer with respect to that transaction will end no earlier than one year after the earlier of (1) the date on which the taxpayer furnishes the information required under section 6011, or (2) the date that a material advisor furnishes to the Secretary, upon written request, the information required under section 6112 with respect to the taxpayer related to the listed transaction. Accordingly, if neither the taxpayer nor a material advisor furnishes the requisite information, the period of limitations on assessment will remain open, and thus, the tax with respect to the listed transaction may be assessed at any time. Section 6501(c)(10) is effective for taxable years with respect to which the period of limitations on assessment did not expire prior to October 22, 2004.As noted, section 6501(c)(10) applies when a taxpayer does not properly disclose a listed transaction (as defined in section 6707A(c)(2)) as required under section 6011. Taxpayers are required under section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011 (collectively referred to as the “section 6011 disclosure rules”) to disclose certain information regarding each reportable transaction in which the taxpayer participated. See Treas. Reg. §§1.6011-4; 20.6011-4; 25.6011-4; 31.6011-4; 53.6011-4; 54.6011-4; and 56.6011-4. Among the transactions that are reportable are “listed transactions.” See Treas. Reg. §1.6011-4(b)(2). Under the section 6011 disclosure rules, a listed transaction is a transaction that is the same as, or substantially similar to, a transaction that the IRS has determined to be a tax avoidance transaction and identified by notice, regulation, or other form of published guidance. Treas. Reg. §1.6011-4(b)(2). Section 6707A(c)(2) incorporates the same definition of listed transaction. For a list of transactions the IRS has identified as listed transactions, see Notice 2009-59, 2009-31 IRB 1. See §601.601(d)(2).If the section 6011 disclosure rules require a taxpayer to disclose a listed transaction, the taxpayer must complete and file a disclosure statement in accordance with the section 6011 disclosure rules. The section 6011 disclosure rules currently require that Form 8886, “Reportable Transaction Disclosure Statement” (or successor form), be used as the disclosure statement and be completed in accordance with the instructions to the form. The Form 8886 (or successor form) generally must be attached to the taxpayer's original or amended tax return for each taxable year for which a taxpayer participates in a listed transaction. Treas. Reg. §1.6011-4(e)(1). If a listed transaction results in a loss that is carried back to a prior year, Form 8886 (or successor form) must be attached to the taxpayer's application for tentative refund or amended tax return for that prior year. The taxpayer also must send a copy of Form 8886 (or successor form) to the IRS Office of Tax Shelter Analysis (OTSA), generally at the same time that a disclosure statement pertaining to a particular listed transaction is first filed. Under the current rules, when a transaction is identified as a listed transaction after the date on which the taxpayer files a tax return (including an amended return) for a taxable year reflecting the taxpayer's participation in the listed transaction and before the end of the period of limitations for assessment of tax for any taxable year in which the taxpayer participated in the listed transaction, then the taxpayer must file Form 8886 (or successor form) with OTSA within 90 calendar days after the date the transaction became a listed transaction.If a taxpayer does not disclose its participation in a listed transaction in accordance with all of the requirements of the section 6011 disclosure rules and section 6501(c)(10) applies, then the time to assess tax related to the listed transaction will expire no earlier than the earlier of (1) one year after the date on which the information described in section 6501(c)(10)(A) is provided, or (2) one year after the date on which the information described in section 6501(c)(10)(B) is provided.The IRS and Treasury Department issued Rev. Proc. 2005-26 (2005-1 CB 965) on April 25, 2005, to provide interim guidance on section 6501(c)(10). The revenue procedure prescribes how taxpayers and material advisors should disclose listed transactions that were not properly disclosed under section 6011 in order to start the one-year period under section 6501(c)(10). Taxpayers may continue to rely on Rev. Proc. 2005-26 until temporary or final regulations are issued under section 6501(c)(10). See §601.601(d)(2). In that revenue procedure, the IRS and Treasury Department also requested comments concerning the procedures set forth in the revenue procedure, especially their application to partners and partnerships. One comment was received but it did not address the limitations period.Explanation of Provisions These proposed regulations provide rules reflecting the enactment of section 6501(c)(10) by the AJCA. They explain how to determine whether section 6501(c)(10) applies and, if so, the applicable period of limitations on assessment. As a preliminary matter, the effective date of section 6501(c)(10) limits its application to taxable years with respect to which the period of limitations on assessment was open on or after October 22, 2004 (the date the AJCA was enacted). Thus, for taxable years for which a return was due prior to October 22, 2004, an analysis under section 6501 must be conducted to determine if the period of limitations on assessment was open under the general three-year period or an exception other than section 6501(c)(10).1. Application of Section 6501(c)(10). The general rule for applying section 6501(c)(10) is set forth in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(1) of these proposed regulations. The first step in analyzing whether section 6501(c)(10) applies is to determine whether the taxpayer failed to comply with any disclosure obligation under the section 6011 disclosure rules with respect to a listed transaction (as defined in section 6707A(c)(2)) for any taxable year. The IRS and Treasury Department have issued several regulations under section 6011, some of which apply only to certain types of taxpayers. The disclosure requirements also vary among the regulations. Therefore, particular attention must be paid to the effective dates of the various section 6011 disclosure rules in order to determine whether there was a disclosure obligation.If there was no obligation to disclose the listed transaction, or if the taxpayer complied with its disclosure obligations, then section 6501(c)(10) does not apply. If there was a disclosure obligation and a failure to disclose as required, then section 6501(c)(10) applies. Section 6501(c)(10) applies to all open years for which the taxpayer failed to disclose its participation in the transaction as required under the section 6011 disclosure rules, even if the disclosures required under section 6011 were not due in, or with a return for, the year of participation but were due in a later year when the transaction was subsequently identified as a listed transaction. If section 6501(c)(10) applies because a taxpayer failed to disclose a listed transaction and the transaction is later removed from the category of listed transactions, section 6501(c)(10) will continue to apply with respect to the tax years for which disclosure was required. If section 6501(c)(10) applies, then the period of limitations with respect to the listed transaction will remain open until at least the earlier of (1) one year after the date on which the taxpayer provides a disclosure to satisfy section 6501(c)(10)(A) (as provided in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5) described elsewhere in this preamble), or (2) one year after the date on which a material advisor provides the IRS with information concerning the taxpayer's participation in the transaction sufficient to satisfy section 6501(c)(10)(B) (as provided in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(6) described elsewhere in this preamble). If either paragraph (g)(5) or (g)(6) is satisfied, the period of limitations on assessment will end under the circumstances described in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(2) of these proposed regulations.Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(2) of these proposed regulations also provides guidance on how section 6501(c)(10) interacts with the otherwise applicable period of limitations provided in the Internal Revenue Code. The proposed regulations confirm that section 6501(c)(10) does not operate to extend a limitations period that expired before the effective date of section 6501(c)(10) or before the date on which the failure to disclose occurs. In addition, a taxpayer or material advisor cannot shorten any other applicable period of limitations on assessment by following the procedures to begin the one-year period provided under section 6501(c)(10), including, but not limited to, a limitations period that has been extended by agreement under section 6501(c)(4), or the limitations period described in section 6501(c)(1) relating to a false or fraudulent return.The terms “listed transaction,” “material advisor,” and “taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates” are defined in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(3) of these proposed regulations by cross-reference to section 6707A and the relevant regulations under sections 6011 and 6111.Under section 6501(c)(10), the term “listed transaction” is defined by reference to section 6707A(c)(2), which defines a listed transaction as “a reportable transaction that is the same as, or substantially similar to, a transaction specifically identified by the Secretary as a tax avoidance transaction for purposes of section 6011.” Although section 6707A was enacted by section 811 of the AJCA and is effective for returns and statements due after October 22, 2004, and which were not filed before that date, its definition of “listed transactions” incorporates transactions identified as listed transactions in the section 6011 disclosure rules before section 6707A was enacted. Accordingly, any transactions that were listed transactions as of October 22, 2004, under the section 6011 disclosure rules are listed transactions under section 6707A and, thus, for purposes of section 6501(c)(10). Therefore, section 6501(c)(10) applies to transactions that were identified as listed transactions prior to October 22, 2004.The term “taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates” identifies the years to which section 6501(c)(10) applies. Clarification is necessary because a taxpayer may participate in a listed transaction over multiple years, because a transaction may be identified as a listed transaction after the taxpayer enters into the transaction, and because the section 6011 disclosure rules may require disclosure in a year in which the taxpayer did not participate in the listed transaction. The term “taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates” means each taxable year that the taxpayer participated (as defined by the regulations under section 6011) in a transaction that was identified as a listed transaction and for which there was no proper disclosure when required under the section 6011 disclosure rules. For these purposes, it does not matter whether the transaction was identified as a listed transaction before or after the taxpayer filed a tax return for any taxable year in which the taxpayer participated in the transaction. On occasion, the section 6011 disclosure rule may require that a disclosure be filed in a taxable year or with a tax return for a taxable year other than the taxable year in which the taxpayer participated in the listed transaction. In those circumstances, the taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates is not the taxable year in which the disclosure is required to be filed, but each taxable year that the taxpayer participated in the listed transaction.Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(4) of these proposed regulations provides the rule for application of section 6501(c)(10) in the case of taxpayers who are partners in partnerships, shareholders in S corporations, or beneficiaries of trusts. If these taxpayers were required to disclose their participation in a listed transaction under the section 6011 disclosure rules, and failed to disclose, then the period of limitations on assessment with respect to each partner, shareholder, or beneficiary that failed to disclose will remain open under section 6501(c)(10) even if the partnership, S corporation, or trust disclosed in accordance with the section 6011 disclosure rules and even if another partner, shareholder, or beneficiary disclosed in accordance with the section 6011 disclosure rules. This rule is as adopted because the period of limitations on assessment is specific to each taxpayer. Consistent with the above rule, a failure to disclose by an entity will not cause section 6501(c)(10) to apply to all of the taxpayers who are partners, shareholders or beneficiaries of the entity.2. One-Year Period Under Section 6501(c)(10).Guidance on the events that will start the one-year period under section 6501(c)(10) is provided in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5) and (6) of these proposed regulations.a. Disclosures by taxpayers of required information.Under section 6501(c)(10)(A), if there is a failure to disclose information related to a listed transaction as required under the section 6011 disclosure rules, the time to assess tax will end no earlier than one year after the date “the Secretary is furnished the information so required.” Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(A)-(C) of these proposed regulations sets forth the general procedures for how to furnish the information to the IRS. These procedures are similar to the ones required under the section 6011 disclosure rules because failure to comply with those rules triggers the application of section 6501(c)(10). Because the rules set forth in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i) generally concern annual returns, §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(ii) provides that the IRS may issue published guidance that prescribes alternative procedures to address particular listed transactions, if necessary, in the case of returns other than annual returns.Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(A) of these proposed regulations provides that to begin the one-year period under section 6501(c)(10)(A) taxpayers must complete Form 8886 (or successor form) in accordance with the instructions to the form and these proposed regulations and submit the completed form with a cover letter (as described in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(B)) to OTSA. Under the procedures set forth in Revenue Procedure 2005-26, taxpayers were required to submit the completed form and cover letter both to OTSA and the Internal Revenue Service Center where the taxpayer filed its original return in all cases and, if applicable, to an IRS examiner or Appeals officer. These proposed regulations simplify the procedures taxpayers need to follow by only requiring them to submit the information to one IRS office instead of two, unless the taxpayer also needs to submit a copy to an IRS examiner or Appeals officer, as discussed later in this Preamble.Taxpayers must complete the most current version of the form available at the time the taxpayer attempts to satisfy section 6501(c)(10). In other words, if the Form 8886 (or successor form) changes between the date that the taxpayer was required to disclose the listed transaction under the section 6011 disclosure rules and the date that the taxpayer discloses the listed transaction for purposes of section 6501(c)(10), then the taxpayer must follow the rules in effect on the date of the section 6501(c)(10) disclosure.The taxpayer also must indicate on the form that the disclosure is for purposes of section 6501(c)(10) and the tax return(s) and taxable year(s) for which the taxpayer is making a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure. The section 6501(c)(10) disclosure will only be effective for the tax return(s) and taxable year(s) that the taxpayer specifies he or she is attempting to disclose for purposes of section 6501(c)(10). Thus, for example, if a taxpayer failed to disclose the taxpayer's participation in a listed transaction in three taxable years but the taxpayer's section 6501(c)(10) disclosure only specifies one taxable year, then the period of limitations on assessment for the other two taxable years will remain open under section 6501(c)(10). If the Form 8886 (or successor form) contains a line for that purpose, then taxpayers may use that line, so long as the line is completed in accordance with the instructions to the form. If no line is provided on the form, then the taxpayer must include on the top of Page 1 of the Form 8886, and each copy of the form, the following statement: “ Section 6501(c)(10) Disclosure” followed by the tax return(s) and taxable year(s) for which the taxpayer is making a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure. This information is necessary to place the IRS on notice that the taxpayer is attempting to remedy its failure to properly disclose the listed transaction and, thus, the one-year period will start to run with respect to the tax years identified. Because the IRS may have as little as one year to determine whether to conduct an examination and, if it does conduct an examination, to determine whether any additional tax is due with respect to the listed transaction, it is important that the IRS receives proper notice that the one-year period has started.Taxpayers must submit a separate Form 8886 (or successor form) and cover letter (discussed elsewhere in this Preamble) for each listed transaction that the taxpayer did not properly disclose under the section 6011 disclosure rules. If the taxpayer participated in one listed transaction over multiple years, then the taxpayer may submit one Form 8886 (or successor form), so long as the taxpayer indicates on the Form 8886 all of the tax returns and taxable years for which the taxpayer is making a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure. If a taxpayer participated in more than one listed transaction, then the taxpayer must submit separate Forms 8886 (or successor form) for each listed transaction, unless the listed transactions are the same or substantially similar, in which case all the listed transactions may be reported on one Form 8886.Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(B) of these proposed regulations provides the requirements for the cover letter. The cover letter must identify the tax return(s) and taxable year(s) for which the taxpayer is making a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure. In addition, the cover letter must include the statement provided in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(B) signed under penalties of perjury by the taxpayer and, if applicable, by the paid preparer preparing the Form 8886. The cover letter is necessary because the Form 8886 does not currently contain a penalties-of-perjury statement or place for signature.A special rule for taxpayers under examination or Appeals consideration by the IRS is provided in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(C) of these proposed regulations. If the taxpayer wants to make a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure for a taxable year or a listed transaction under examination or Appeals consideration, then, in addition to the otherwise applicable filing obligations set forth in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(A), the taxpayer must submit a copy of the submission made under paragraph (g)(5)(i)(A) to the IRS examiner or Appeals officer examining or considering the taxable year to which the section 6501(c)(10) disclosure relates. This rule is adopted to ensure that the IRS personnel who are considering the taxpayer's tax year(s) at issue are made aware as soon as possible that the one-year period under section 6501(c)(10) may have started to run, so that whatever action is necessary can be taken within the one-year period.Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(D) provides guidance concerning the date on which the taxpayer is considered to have furnished the information to the IRS to satisfy section 6501(c)(10)(A) and start the running of the one-year period. The one-year period under section 6501(c)(10)(A) will begin on the date that the taxpayer satisfies all the requirements set forth in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5)(i)(A) through (C). If the required procedures are not completed on the same date, the one-year period will begin on the date that the last procedure is satisfied. For example, if a taxpayer mails a completed Form 8886 to OTSA but not to the IRS examiner or Appeals officer who is examining or considering the taxable year to which the section 6501(c)(10) disclosure relates, the one-year period under section 6501(c)(10)(A) will not begin until both events occur.Information provided under §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5) is deemed furnished on the date the IRS receives the information. Section 7502 does not apply to the mailing of the information detailed in §301.6501(c)-1(g)(5), because the information is not required to be filed within a prescribed period or on or before a prescribed date. Taxpayers can determine the date the IRS receives the information by using a delivery service that provides a way to track delivery, such as U.S. registered or certified mail, express or priority mail, or delivery confirmation from the U.S. post office or a private delivery service that provides tracking. Moreover, documentation from the post office or private delivery service showing the date the information was delivered to the IRS, together with evidence that the envelope was properly addressed to the office to which the information was required to be sent, generally will be sufficient proof that the IRS received the information, unless the IRS can establish that it did not in fact receive the information. Separate delivery confirmation documentation should be obtained to establish receipt by OTSA and the appropriate IRS revenue agent or Appeals officer, if applicable.b. Disclosures by material advisors. Under section 6501(c)(10)(B), if a taxpayer fails to disclose information related to a listed transaction as required under the section 6011 disclosure rules, the time to assess tax will end no earlier than one year after the date “a material advisor meets the requirements of section 6112 with respect to a request by the Secretary under section 6112(b) relating to such transaction with respect to such taxpayer.” Section 6112 requires material advisors to maintain lists of advisees and other information with respect to reportable transactions, including listed transactions, and to furnish that information to the IRS upon request. The term “material advisor” is defined in §301.6111-3(b). The IRS and Treasury Department finalized regulations under section 6112 in TD 9352 (72 FR 43154) published on August 3, 2007. Section 6112 and §301.6112-1 provide guidance relating to the preparation, content, maintenance, retention, and furnishing of lists by material advisors.Section 6501(c)(10)(B) provides that a material advisor must satisfy the requirements of section 6112 to begin the one-year period. Information provided in response to another method of inquiry, such as an Information Document Request in a section 6700 investigation, will not begin the one-year period. In addition, §301.6501(c)-1(g)(6)(i) provides that the material advisor must furnish the information described in §301.6112-1(e) with respect to the taxpayer that failed to properly disclose the listed transaction. Thus, if the material advisor furnishes the information described in §301.6112-1(e) for some, or even most, of its clients but not for a particular taxpayer that failed to properly disclose the listed transaction, then the assessment period for that taxpayer will remain open under section 6501(c)(10).Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(6)(ii) of these proposed regulations clarifies that the one-year period will begin once the material advisor furnishes the information in response to an IRS request under section 6112, regardless of whether the material advisor provides the information within 20 business days of the IRS's request as required by section 6708. If the material advisor furnishes the required information over the course of multiple days, the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section will be deemed satisfied and the one-year period will begin on the date that the IRS is furnished the information that, together with prior information, satisfies the requirements of section 6112 and §301.6112-1 with respect to the taxpayer. The information is deemed furnished for purposes of section 6501(c)(10) on the date the material advisor is treated as satisfying the requirements of section 6112 under the rules applicable to that section.3. Taxes that can be Assessed under Section 6501(c)(10). Section 6501(c)(10) allows the IRS to assess any tax with respect to a listed transaction for the taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates. Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(7) of these proposed regulations provides that taxes with respect to the listed transaction include, but are not limited to, (1) adjustments made to the tax consequences claimed on the return, (2) adjustments to any item to the extent the item is affected by the listed transaction even if it is unrelated to the listed transaction, and (3) interest and penalties that are related to the listed transaction or the adjustments made to the tax consequences (see I.R.C. §§6601(e)(1) and 6665(a)(2)). An example of an item affected by the listed transaction but not related to the listed transaction is the threshold for the medical expense deduction under section 213 that varies if there is a change in an individual's adjusted gross income. Examples of a penalty related to the adjustments made to the tax consequences are the accuracy-related penalties under sections 6662 and 6662A. An example of a penalty related to the listed transaction is the penalty under section 6707A for failure to file the disclosure statement reporting the taxpayer's participation in the listed transaction.4. Examples. Section 301.6501(c)-1(g)(8) of these proposed regulations contains examples of the application of section 6501(c)(10) to various types of taxpayers participating in listed transactions. Additional examples illustrate the application of the one-year period under section 6501(c)(10), the coordination of section 6501(c)(10) with other limitations periods provided by the Internal Revenue Code, and tax that can be assessed with respect to a listed transaction.Proposed Effective/Applicability Date When adopted as final regulations, these rules will apply to taxable years with respect to which the period of limitations on assessment did not expire before the date of publication of a Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register. However, taxpayers may rely on these proposed regulations for taxable years with respect to which the period of limitations on assessment expired before the publication of the Treasury decision. Otherwise, Rev. Proc. 2005-26 continues to apply for taxable years to which these regulations do not apply and for which the period of limitations on assessment did not expire before April 8, 2005 - the effective date of Rev. Proc. 2005-26.Effect on Other Documents Upon the publication of final regulations under section 6501(c)(10) in the Federal Register, Rev. Proc. 2005-26 (2005-1 CB 965) will be superseded for taxable years with respect to which the period of limitations on assessment did not expire before the date of publication of a Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register.Special Analyses It has been determined that this notice of proposed rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It also has been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations.It is hereby certified that these regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6). Section 6501(c)(10) applies when taxpayers fail to comply with the reporting requirements set forth in section 6011. The Treasury Department and the IRS do not know the exact number and types of taxpayers that fail to comply with those requirements. However, although the Treasury Department and the IRS are aware that many tax avoidance transactions involve pass-through entities, when passthrough entities are utilized, the entities are not ultimately liable for the tax; rather, the taxpayers subject to section 6501(c)(10) will be the individuals and corporations owning, directly or indirectly, the interests in the pass-though entities. Therefore, the Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that these proposed regulations will not affect a substantial number of small entities.In addition, the Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that any impact on small entities resulting from these proposed regulations will not be significant. Most of the information required under these proposed regulations is already required by other regulations or forms, namely §1.6011-4, §301.6112-1, and Form 8886, “Reportable Transaction Disclosure Statement.” The only new information required to be submitted to the IRS is a cover letter, which must contain a reference to the tax returns and taxable year(s) at issue and a statement signed under penalty of perjury. The cover letter should take minimal time and expense to prepare. Therefore, the additional requirement of the cover letter should not significantly increase the burden on taxpayers. Based on these facts, the Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that these proposed regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, this notice of proposed rulemaking will be submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on their impact on small business.Comments and Requests for a Public Hearing Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any written (a signed original and eight (8) copies) or electronic comments that are submitted timely to the IRS. The IRS and Treasury Department request comments on the substance of the proposed regulations, as well as on the clarity of the proposed rules and how they can be made easier to understand. All comments submitted by the public will be made available for public inspection and copying. A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person that timely submits written comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing will be published in the Federal Register.Drafting Information The principal author of these regulations is Audra M. Dineen of the Office of the Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration).List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 301 Employment taxes, Estate taxes, Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.Proposed Amendments to the Regulations Accordingly, 26 CFR Part 301 is proposed to be amended as follows:PART 301 - - PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATIONParagraph 1. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read in part as follows:Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *Par. 2. Section 301.6501(c)-1 is amended by adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:§301.6501(c)-1 Exceptions to general period of limitations on assessment and collection.* * * * *(g) Listed transactions—(1) In general. If a taxpayer is required to disclose a listed transaction under section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011 and does not do so in the time and manner required, then the time to assess any tax attributable to that listed transaction for the taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates (as defined in paragraph (g)(3)(iii) of this section) will not expire before the earlier of one year after the date on which the taxpayer makes the disclosure described in paragraph (g)(5) of this section or one year after the date on which a material advisor makes a disclosure described in paragraph (g)(6) of this section.(2) Limitations period if paragraph (g)(5) or (g)(6) is satisfied. If one of the disclosure provisions described in paragraphs (g)(5) or (g)(6) of this section is satisfied, then the tax attributable to the listed transaction may be assessed at any time before the expiration of the limitations period that would have otherwise applied under this section (determined without regard to paragraph (g)(1) of this section) or the period ending one year after the date that one of the disclosure provisions described in paragraphs (g)(5) or (g)(6) of this section was satisfied, whichever is later. If both disclosure provisions are satisfied, the one-year period will begin on the earlier of the dates on which the provisions were satisfied. Paragraph (g)(1) of this section does not apply to any period of limitations on assessment that expired before the date on which the failure to disclose the listed transaction under section 6011 occurred.(3) Definitions—(i) Listed transaction. The term listed transaction means a transaction described in section 6707A(c)(2) of the Code and §1.6011-4(b)(2) of this chapter.(ii) Material advisor. The term material advisor means a person described in section 6111(b)(1) of the Code and §301.6111-3(b) of this chapter.(iii) Taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates. The taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates are each taxable year that the taxpayer participated (as defined under section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011) in a transaction that was identified as a listed transaction and the taxpayer failed to disclose the listed transaction as required under section 6011. If the taxable year in which the taxpayer participated in the listed transaction is different from the taxable year in which the taxpayer is required to disclose the listed transaction under section 6011, the taxable year(s) to which the failure to disclose relates are each taxable year that the taxpayer participated in the transaction.(4) Application of paragraph with respect to pass-through entities. In the case of taxpayers who are partners in partnerships, shareholders in S corporations, or beneficiaries of trusts and are required to disclose a listed transaction under section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011, paragraph (g)(1) of this section will apply to a particular partner, shareholder, or beneficiary if that particular taxpayer does not disclose within the time and in the form and manner provided by section 6011 and §1.6011-4(d) and (e), regardless of whether the partnership, S corporation, or trust or another partner, shareholder, or beneficiary discloses in accordance with section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011. Similarly, because paragraph (g)(1) of this section applies on a taxpayer-by-taxpayer basis, the failure of a partnership, S corporation, or trust that has a disclosure obligation under section 6011 and does not disclose within the time or in the form and manner provided by §1.6011-4(d) and (e) will not cause paragraph (g)(1) of this section to apply automatically to all the partners, shareholders or beneficiaries of the entity. Instead, the application of paragraph (g)(1) of this section will be determined based on whether the particular taxpayer satisfied their disclosure obligation under section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011.(5) Taxpayer's disclosure of a listed transaction that taxpayer did not properly disclose under section 6011—(i) In general—(A) Method of disclosure. The taxpayer must complete the most current version of Form 8886, “Reportable Transaction Disclosure Statement” (or successor form), available on the date the taxpayer attempts to satisfy this paragraph in accordance with §1.6011-4(d) (in effect on that date) and the instructions to that form. The taxpayer must indicate on the Form 8886 that the form is being submitted for purposes of section 6501(c)(10) and the tax return(s) and taxable year(s) for which the taxpayer is making a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure. The section 6501(c)(10) disclosure will only be effective for the tax return(s) and taxable year(s) that the taxpayer specifies he or she is attempting to disclose for purposes of section 6501(c)(10). If the Form 8886 contains a line for this purpose then the taxpayer must complete the line in accordance with the instructions to that form. Otherwise, the taxpayer must include on the top of Page 1 of the Form 8886, and each copy of the form, the following statement: “ Section 6501(c)(10) Disclosure” followed by the tax return(s) and taxable year(s) for which the taxpayer is making a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure. For example, if the taxpayer did not properly disclose its participation in a listed transaction the tax consequences of which were reflected on the taxpayer's Form 1040 for the 2005 taxable year, the taxpayer must include the following statement: “ Section 6501(c)(10) Disclosure; 2005 Form 1040” on the form. The taxpayer must submit the properly completed Form 8886 and a cover letter, which must be completed in accordance with the requirements set forth in paragraph (g)(5)(i)(B) of this section, to the Office of Tax Shelter Analysis (OTSA). The taxpayer is permitted, but not required, to file an amended return with the Form 8886 and cover letter. Separate Forms 8886 and separate cover letters must be submitted for each listed transaction the taxpayer did not properly disclose under section 6011. If the taxpayer participated in one listed transaction over multiple years, the taxpayer may submit one Form 8886 (or successor form) and cover letter and indicate on that form all of the tax returns and taxable years for which the taxpayer is making a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure. If a taxpayer participated in more than one listed transaction, then the taxpayer must submit separate Forms 8886 (or successor form) for each listed transaction, unless the listed transactions are the same or substantially similar, in which case all the listed transactions may be reported on one Form 8886.(B) Cover letter. A cover letter to which a Form 8886 is to be attached must identify the tax return(s) and taxable year(s) for which the taxpayer is making a section 6501(c)(10) disclosure and include the following statement signed under penalties of perjury by the taxpayer and if the Form 8886 is prepared by a paid preparer, the Form 8886 must be signed under penalties of perjury by the paid preparer as well:Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this reportable transaction disclosure statement and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, this reportable transaction disclosure statement is true, correct, and complete. Declaration of preparer (other than taxpayer) is based on all information of which the preparer has any knowledge.(C) Taxpayer under examination or Appeals consideration. A taxpayer making a disclosure under paragraph (g)(5) of this section with respect to a taxable year under examination or Appeals consideration by the IRS must satisfy the requirements of paragraphs (g)(5)(i)(A) and (B) of this section and also submit a copy of the submission to the IRS examiner or Appeals officer examining or considering the taxable year(s) to which the disclosure under paragraph (g) of this section relates.(D) Date the one-year period will begin to run if paragraph (g)(5) satisfied. Unless an earlier expiration is provided for in paragraph (g)(6) of this section, the time to assess tax under paragraph (g) of this section will not expire before one year after the date on which the Secretary is furnished the information from the taxpayer that satisfies all the requirements of paragraphs (g)(5)(i)(A) and (B) of this section and, if applicable, paragraph (g)(5)(i)(C) of this section. If the taxpayer does not satisfy all of the requirements on the same date, the one-year period will begin on the date that the IRS is furnished the information that, together with prior disclosures of information, satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section. For purposes of paragraph (g)(5) of this section, the information is deemed furnished on the date the IRS receives the information.(ii) Exception for returns other than annual returns. The IRS may prescribe alternative procedures to satisfy the requirements of this paragraph (g)(5) in a revenue procedure, notice, or other guidance published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin for circumstances involving returns other than annual returns.(6) Material advisor's disclosure of a listed transaction not properly disclosed by a taxpayer under section 6011—(i) Method of disclosure. In response to a written request of the IRS under section 6112, a material advisor with respect to a listed transaction must furnish to the IRS the information described in section 6112 and §301.6112-1(b) in the form and manner prescribed by section 6112 and §301.6112-1(e). If the information the material advisor furnishes identifies the taxpayer as a person who engaged in the listed transaction, regardless of whether the material advisor provides the information before or after the taxpayer's failure to disclose the listed transaction under section 6011, then the requirements of this paragraph (g)(6) will be satisfied for that taxpayer. The requirements of this paragraph (g)(6) will be considered satisfied even if the material advisor furnishes the information required under section 6112 to the IRS after the date prescribed in section 6708 or published guidance relating to section 6708.(ii) Date the one-year period will begin if paragraph (g)(6) is satisfied. Unless an earlier expiration is provided for in paragraph (g)(5) of this section, the time to assess tax under paragraph (g) of this section will expire one year after the date on which the material advisor satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6)(i) of this section with respect to the taxpayer. For purposes of paragraph (g)(6) of this section, information is deemed to be furnished on the date that, in response to a request under section 6112, the IRS receives the information from a material advisor that satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6)(i) of this section with respect to the taxpayer.(7) Tax assessable under this section. If the period of limitations on assessment for a taxable year remains open under this section, the Secretary has authority to assess any tax with respect to the listed transaction in that year. This includes, but is not limited to, adjustments made to the tax consequences claimed on the return plus interest, additions to tax, additional amounts, and penalties that are related to the listed transaction or adjustments made to the tax consequences. This also includes any item to the extent the item is affected by the listed transaction even if it is unrelated to the listed transaction. An example of an item affected by, but unrelated to, a listed transaction is the threshold for the medical expense deduction under section 213 that varies if there is a change in an individual's adjusted gross income. An example of a penalty related to the listed transaction is the penalty under section 6707A for failure to file the disclosure statement reporting the taxpayer's participation in the listed transaction. Examples of penalties related to the adjustments made to the tax consequences are the accuracy-related penalties under sections 6662 and 6662A.(8) Examples. The rules of paragraph (g) of this section are illustrated by the following examples:Example 1. No requirement to disclose under section 6011. P, an individual, is a partner in a partnership that entered into a transaction in 2001 that was the same as or substantially similar to the transaction identified as a listed transaction in Notice 2000-44 (2000-2 CB 255). P claimed a loss from the transaction on his Form 1040 for the tax year 2001. P filed the Form 1040 prior to June 14, 2002. P did not disclose his participation in the listed transaction because P was not required to disclose the transaction under the applicable section 6011 regulations (TD 8961). Although the transaction was a listed transaction and P did not disclose the transaction, P had no obligation to include on any return or statement any information with respect to a listed transaction within the meaning of section 6501(c)(10) because TD 8961 only applied to corporations, not individuals. Accordingly, section 6501(c)(10) does not apply.Example 2. Taxable year to which the failure to disclose relates when transaction is identified as a listed transaction after taxpayer files a tax return for that year. (i) In January 2009, A, a calendar year taxpayer, enters into a transaction that at the time is not a listed transaction. A reports the tax consequences from the transaction on its individual income tax return for 2009 timely filed on April 15, 2010. The time for the IRS to assess tax against A under the general three-year period of limitations for A's 2009 taxable year would expire on April 15, 2013. A only participated in the transaction in 2009. On March 1, 2012, the IRS identifies the transaction as a listed transaction. A does not file the Form 8886 with OTSA by May 30, 2012.(ii) The period of limitations on assessment for A's 2009 taxable year was open on the date the transaction was identified as a listed transaction. Under the applicable section 6011 regulations (TD 9350, 2007-38 IRB 607), A must disclose its participation in the transaction by filing a completed Form 8886 with OTSA on or before May 30, 2012, which is 90 days after the date the transaction became a listed transaction. A did not disclose the transaction as required. A's failure to disclose relates to taxable year 2009 even though the obligation to disclose did not arise until 2012. Section 6501(c)(10) operates to keep the period of limitations on assessment open for the 2009 taxable year with respect to the listed transaction until at least one year after the date A satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section or a material advisor satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section with respect to A.Example 3. Requirements of paragraph (g)(6) satisfied. Same facts as Example 2, except that on April 5, 2013, the IRS hand delivers to Advisor J, who is a material advisor, a section 6112 request related to the listed transaction. Advisor J furnishes the required list with all the information required by section 6112 and §301.6112-1, including all the information required with respect to A, to the IRS on May 13, 2013. The submission satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) even though Advisor J furnishes the information outside of the 20-business-day period provided in section 6708. Accordingly, under section 6501(c)(10), the period of limitations with respect to A's taxable year 2009 will end on May 13, 2014, one year after the IRS received the required information, unless the period of limitations remains open under another exception. Any tax for the 2009 taxable year not attributable to the listed transaction must be assessed by April 15, 2013.Example 4. Requirements of paragraph (g)(5) also satisfied. Same facts as Examples 2 and 3, except that on May 23, 2013, A files a properly completed Form 8886 and signed cover letter with OTSA both identifying that the section 6501(c)(10) disclosure relates to A's Form 1040 for 2009. A satisfied the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section as of May 23, 2013. Because the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) were satisfied first as described in Example 3, under section 6501(c)(10) the period of limitations will end on May 13, 2014 (one year after the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) were satisfied) instead of May 23, 2014 (one year after the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) were satisfied). Any tax for the 2009 taxable year not attributable to the listed transaction must be assessed by April 15, 2013.Example 5. Period to assess tax remains open under another exception. Same facts as Examples 2, 3, and 4, except that on April 1, 2013, A signed Form 872, consenting to extend, without restriction, its period of limitations on assessment for taxable year 2009 under section 6501(c)(4) until July 15, 2014. In that case, although under section 6501(c)(10) the period of limitations would otherwise expire on May 13, 2014, the IRS may assess tax with respect to the listed transaction at any time up to and including July 15, 2014, pursuant to section 6501(c)(4). Section 6501(c)(10) can operate to extend the assessment period but cannot shorten any other applicable assessment period.Example 6. Requirements of (g)(5) not satisfied. In 2009, X, a corporation, enters into a listed transaction. On March 15, 2010, X timely files its 2009 Form 1120, reporting the tax consequences from the transaction. X does not disclose the transaction as required under section 6011 when it files its 2009 return. The failure to disclose relates to taxable year 2009. On February 12, 2014, X completes and files a Form 8886 with respect to the listed transaction with OTSA but does not submit a cover letter, as required. The requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section have not been satisfied. Therefore, the time to assess tax against X with respect to the transaction for taxable year 2009 remains open under section 6501(c)(10).Example 7. Taxable year to which the failure to disclose relates when transaction is identified as a listed transaction after first year of participation. (i) On December 30, 2003, Y, a corporation, enters into a transaction that at the time is not a reportable transaction. On March 15, 2004, Y timely files its 2003 Form 1120, reporting the tax consequences from the transaction. On April 1, 2004, the IRS issues Notice 2004-31 that identifies the transaction as a listed transaction. Y also reports tax consequences from the transaction on its 2004 Form 1120, which it timely filed on March 15, 2005. Y did not attach a completed Form 8886 to its 2004 Form 1120 and did not send a copy of the form to OTSA. The general three-year period of limitations on assessment for Y's 2003 and 2004 taxable years would expire on March 15, 2007, and March 17, 2008, respectively.(ii) The period of limitations on assessment for Y's 2003 taxable year was open on the date the transaction was identified as a listed transaction. Under the applicable section 6011 regulations (TD 9108), Y should have disclosed its participation in the transaction with its next filed return, which was its 2004 Form 1120, but Y did not disclose its participation. Y's failure to disclose with the 2004 Form 1120 relates to taxable years 2003 and 2004. Section 6501(c)(10) operates to keep the period of limitations on assessment open for the 2003 and 2004 taxable years with respect to the listed transaction until at least one year after the date Y satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section or a material advisor satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section with respect to Y.Example 8. Section 6501(c)(10) applies to keep one partner's period of limitations on assessment open. T and S are partners in a partnership, TS, that enters into a listed transaction in 2010. T and S each receive a Schedule K-1 from TS on April 11, 2011. On April 15, 2011, TS, T and S each file their 2010 returns. Under the applicable section 6011 regulations, TS, T, and S each are required to disclose the transaction. TS attaches a completed Form 8886 to its 2010 Form 1065 and sends a copy of Form 8886 to OTSA. Neither T nor S files a disclosure statement with their respective returns nor sends a copy to OTSA on April 15, 2011. On May 17, 2011, T timely files a completed Form 8886 with OTSA pursuant to §1.6011-4(e)(1). T's disclosure is timely because T received the Schedule K-1 within 10 calendar days before the due date of the return and, thus, T had 60 calendar days to file Form 8886 with OTSA. TS and T properly disclosed the transaction in accordance with the applicable regulations under section 6011, but S did not. S's failure to disclose relates to taxable year 2010. The time to assess tax with respect to the transaction against S for 2010 remains open under section 6501(c)(10) even though TS and T disclosed the transaction.Example 9. Section 6501(c)(10) satisfied before expiration of three-year period of limitations under section 6501(a). Same facts as Example 8, except that on August 27, 2012, S satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section. No material advisor satisfied the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section with respect to S on a date earlier than August 27, 2012. Under section 6501(c)(10), the period of time in which the IRS may assess tax against S with respect to the listed transaction would expire no earlier than August 27, 2013, one year after the date S satisfied the requirements of paragraph (g)(5). As the general three-year period of limitations on assessment under section 6501(a) does not expire until April 15, 2014, the IRS will have until that date to assess any tax with respect to the listed transaction.Example 10. No section 6112 request. B, a calendar year taxpayer, entered into a listed transaction in 2010. B did not comply with the applicable disclosure requirements under section 6011 for taxable year 2010; therefore, section 6501(c)(10) applies to keep the period of limitations on assessment open with respect to the tax related to the transaction until at least one year after B satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section or a material advisor satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section with respect to B. In June 2011, the IRS conducts a section 6700 investigation of Advisor K, who is a material advisor to B with respect to the listed transaction. During the course of the investigation, the IRS obtains the name, address, and TIN of all of Advisor K's clients who engaged in the transaction, including B. The information provided does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) with respect to B because the information was not provided pursuant to a section 6112 request. Therefore, the time to assess tax against B with respect to the transaction for taxable year 2010 remains open under section 6501(c)(10).Example 11. Section 6112 request but the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) are not satisfied with respect to B. Same facts as Example 10, except that on January 2, 2014, the IRS sends by certified mail a section 6112 request to Advisor L, who is another material advisor to B with respect to the listed transaction. Advisor L furnishes some of the information required under section 6112 and §301.6112-1 to the IRS for inspection on January 13, 2014. The list includes information with respect to many clients of Advisor L, but it does not include any information with respect to B. The submission does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section with respect to B. Therefore, the time to assess tax against B with respect to the transaction for taxable year 2010 remains open under section 6501(c)(10).Example 12. Section 6112 submission made before taxpayer failed to disclose a listed transaction. Advisor M, who is a material advisor, advises C, an individual, in 2010 with respect to a transaction that is not a reportable transaction at that time. C files its return claiming the tax consequences of the transaction on April 15, 2011. The time for the IRS to assess tax against C under the general three-year period of limitations for C's 2010 taxable year would expire on April 15, 2014. The IRS identifies the transaction as a listed transaction on November 1, 2013. On December 5, 2013, the IRS hand delivers to Advisor M a section 6112 request related to the transaction. Advisor M furnishes the information to the IRS on December 30, 2013. The information contains all the required information with respect to Advisor M's clients, including C. C does not disclose the transaction on or before January 30, 2014, as required under section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011. Advisor M's submission under section 6112 satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section even though it occurred prior to C's failure to disclose the listed transaction. Thus, under section 6501(c)(10), the period of limitations to assess tax against C with respect to the listed transaction will end on December 30, 2014 (one year after the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section were satisfied), unless the period of limitations remains open under another exception.Example 13. Transaction removed from the category of listed transactions after taxpayer failed to disclose. D, a calendar year taxpayer, entered into a listed transaction in 2011. D did not comply with the applicable disclosure requirements under section 6011 for taxable year 2011; therefore, section 6501(c)(10) applies to keep the period of limitations on assessment open with respect to the tax related to the transaction until at least one year after D satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section or a material advisor satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section with respect to D. In 2016, the IRS removes the transaction from the category of listed transactions because of a change in law. Section 6501(c)(10) continues to apply to keep the period of limitations on assessment open for D's taxable year 2011.Example 14. Taxes assessed with respect to the listed transaction. (i) F, an individual, enters into a listed transaction in 2009. F files its 2009 Form 1040 on April 15, 2010, but does not disclose his participation in the listed transaction in accordance with section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011. F's failure to disclose relates to taxable year 2009. Thus, section 6501(c)(10) applies to keep the period of limitations on assessment open with respect to the tax related to the listed transaction for taxable year 2009 until at least one year after the date F satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(5) of this section or a material advisor satisfies the requirements of paragraph (g)(6) of this section with respect to F.(ii) On July 1, 2014, the IRS completes an examination of F's 2009 taxable year and disallows the tax consequences claimed as a result of the listed transaction. The disallowance of a loss increased F's adjusted gross income. Due to the increase of F's adjusted gross income, certain credits, such as the child tax credit, and exemption deductions were disallowed or reduced because of limitations based on adjusted gross income. In addition, F now is liable for the alternative minimum tax. The examination also uncovered that F claimed two deductions on Schedule C to which F was not entitled. Under section 6501(c)(10), the IRS can timely issue a statutory notice of deficiency (and assess in due course) against F for the deficiency resulting from (1) disallowing the loss, (2) disallowing the credits and exemptions to which F was not entitled based on F's increased adjusted gross income, and (3) being liable for the alternative minimum tax. In addition, the IRS can assess any interest and applicable penalties related to those adjustments, such as the accuracy-related penalty under sections 6662 and 6662A and the penalty under section 6707A for F's failure to disclose the transaction as required under section 6011 and the regulations under section 6011. The IRS cannot, however, pursuant to section 6501(c)(10), assess the increase in tax that would result from disallowing the two deductions on F's Schedule C because those deductions are not related to, or affected by, the adjustments concerning the listed transaction.(9) Effective/applicability date. The rules of this paragraph (g) apply to taxable years with respect to which the period of limitations on assessment did not expire before the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register. However, taxpayers may rely on the rules of this paragraph (g) for taxable years with respect to which the period of limitations on assessment expired before the date of publication of the Treasury decision. If an individual does not choose to rely on the rules of this paragraph (g), Rev. Proc. 2005-26 (2005-1 CB 965) will continue to apply to taxable years with respect to which the period of limitations on assessment expired on or after April 8, 2005, and before the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register./s/ Linda E. StiffDeputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement
Part pay Installment Agreement Final Regulations
Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accoun...