internal_revenue_service number release date index number ------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- in re ------------------------------------- department of the treasury washington dc third party communication date of communication month dd yyyy person to contact -------------------------- id no ------------- telephone number --------------------- refer reply to cc psi b09 plr-164117-03 date date legend decedent spouse trust family_trust marital trust a marital trust b ----------------------------- ----------------------------- ------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- son daughter son’s trust daughter’s trust son-in-law grandson granddaughter granddaughter’s trust state statute date date date a b c d e f g h --------------------------- -------------------- ---------------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------- --------------------- --------------------- ---------------------------- --------------------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------ ----------------------- --------------- ------------------ ------------------ ------------------ ------------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- ------------------ ------------------ -------- -------- plr-164117-03 i j k l dear ---------- this is in response to your letter dated date and subsequent correspondence in which you requested a ruling on the generation-skipping_transfer gst tax consequences of severing a_trust into two separate trusts pursuant to ' a of the internal_revenue_code the facts submitted and the representations made are as follows on date decedent executed a will the will provides that the residue of his estate is to be transferred to a revocable_trust trust created by decedent on date for the benefit of his spouse spouse and his descendants article of trust provides that upon decedent’s death the trust estate is to be divided into family_trust marital trust a and marital trust b family_trust is to be funded with property equal to decedent’s unified_credit marital trust a is to be funded with property equal to decedent’s unused gst_exemption martial trust b is to be funded with the remainder of the trust estate article provides that spouse is to receive all of marital trust a’s net_income at least quarter-annually accrued but unpaid income at the time of her death is to be paid to her estate the trustee may distribute the principal from marital trust a to spouse for her support maintenance and medical_care upon spouse’s death the balance of the trust estate of marital trust a is to be added to and become part of family_trust article provides that spouse is to receive all of marital trust b’s net_income at least quarter-annually accrued but unpaid income at the time of her death is to be paid to her estate the trustee may distribute the principal from marital trust b to spouse for her support maintenance and medical_care upon spouse’s death marital trust b is to be disposed of as follows first assets equal to spouse’s unused gst_exemption are to be segregated second the remaining portion of marital trust b if any is to be paid over free of trust as follows two-thirds to decedent’s daughter daughter if living and if not to daughter’s living issue per stirpes and one-third to the trustee of a_trust for decedent’s son son the terms of which are set forth in article son’s trust finally the segregated assets the amount equal to spouse’s gst_exemption are to be paid over to the family_trust article provides that during spouse’s life the trustee of family_trust is to distribute net_income to spouse for her support maintenance and medical_care upon spouse’s death family trust’s assets are to be disposed of as follows two-thirds to the trustee of plr-164117-03 a_trust for daughter the terms of which are set forth in article daughter’s trust and one-third to the trustee of son’s trust article provides that daughter is to receive all of the net_income of her trust and trust principal to provide for her support maintenance and medical_care upon daughter’s death if she is survived by her spouse son-in-law then son-in-law is to receive all of the net_income from daughter’s trust for his lifetime upon the death of the survivor of daughter and son-in-law daughter’s trust will terminate and the remaining principal is to be distributed as follows one-half free of trust to grandson if living and if not to his then living descendants per stirpes and one-half to the trustee of a_trust for granddaughter the terms of which are set forth in article granddaughter’s trust article provides that son is to receive all of his trust’s net_income and principal to provide for his support maintenance and medical_care upon son’s death son’s trust will terminate and be distributed to certain charities article provides that granddaughter is to receive net_income and principal from her trust to provide for her support maintenance medical_care and education income not distributed is to be added to principal upon granddaughter’s death her trust will terminate and be distributed free of trust to her living descendants per stirpes if any if none to grandson if he is living if not to grandson’s living issue per stirpes if any if none to certain charities decedent died on date spouse son daughter son-in-law grandson and granddaughter survived decedent the executor of decedent’s estate timely filed the estate’s federal estate_tax_return and on the return the estate elected under sec_2056 to treat the assets that passed to marital trust a and marital trust b as qualified_terminable_interest_property qtip in addition the estate indicated that family_trust would be funded with assets equaling dollar_figurea marital trust a would be funded with assets equaling dollar_figureb the amount of decedent’s remaining gst_exemption and marital trust b would be funded with assets equaling dollar_figurec the estate also made the reverse_qtip_election under sec_2652 for marital trust a on schedule r of the estate_tax_return spouse died on date survived by son daughter son-in-law grandson and granddaughter the executor of spouse’s estate timely filed the estate’s federal estate_tax_return the return indicates that on date the value of the assets of marital trust a was dollar_figured and the value of the assets of marital trust b was dollar_figuree on the schedule r of the return the estate allocated dollar_figuref of spouse’s available gst_exemption to a_trust spouse created for son spouse’s remaining gst_exemption dollar_figureg was then allocated to marital trust b upon spouse’s death pursuant to article of trust distributions were made from marital trust b free of trust to daughter not a skip_person and son’s trust not a_trust from which a gst event could occur after these distributions the assets remaining in marital trust b were equal to spouse’s remaining gst_exemption dollar_figureg plr-164117-03 also upon spouse’s death pursuant to the terms of article sec_5 and of trust all of marital trust a’s assets were contributed to family_trust and marital trust b’s assets remaining after the distributions to daughter and son’s trust dollar_figureg were contribute to family_trust it has been represented that on date the value of the assets of family_trust was dollar_figureh accordingly as of date family_trust consisted of assets that had been valued at dollar_figurei dollar_figured plus dollar_figureg plus dollar_figureh equals dollar_figurei presently family_trust does not have a zero inclusion_ratio for gst purposes accordingly the trustee intends to divide family_trust under state statute into two separate trusts gst exempt family_trust and gst non-exempt family_trust state statute provides in pertinent part that a trustee may without court approval divide a_trust before or after it is funded into two or more separate trusts the trustee however must determine that dividing the trust is in the best interests of all persons interested in the trust and will not substantially impair the accomplishment of the purposes of the trust the trustee intends to divide family_trust on a fractional bases into gst exempt family_trust and gst non-exempt family_trust pursuant to sec_2642 the numerator of the fraction used to divide family_trust into gst exempt family_trust and gst non- exempt family_trust will be dollar_figurej dollar_figured plus dollar_figureg equals dollar_figurej and the denominator of the fraction will be dollar_figurei based upon this fraction k percent of family trust’s assets will be allocated to gst exempt family_trust and l percent k percent minus percent equals l percent of family trust’s assets will be allocated to gst non-exempt family_trust the terms of gst exempt family_trust and gst non-exempt family_trust will be identical to the terms of family_trust the trustee is requesting a ruling that the proposed division of family_trust into gst exempt family_trust and gst non-exempt family_trust will be a qualified_severance under ' a and that for gst tax purposes gst exempt family_trust will have an inclusion_ratio of zero and gst non-exempt family_trust will have an inclusion_ratio of one law and analysis sec_2642 provides that if a_trust is severed in a qualified_severance the trusts resulting from such severance shall be treated as separate trusts thereafter for purposes of chapter sec_2642 provides that the term qualified_severance means the division of a single trust and the creation by any means available under the governing instrument or under local law of two or more trusts if -- i the single trust was divided on a fractional basis and ii the terms of the new trusts in the aggregate provide for the same succession of interests of beneficiaries as are provided in the original trust plr-164117-03 sec_2642 provides that if a_trust has an inclusion_ratio of greater than zero and less than a severance is a qualified_severance only if the single trust is divided into two trusts one of which receives a fractional share of the total value of all trust assets equal to the applicable_fraction of the single trust immediately before the severance in such case the trust receiving such fractional share shall have an inclusion_ratio of zero and the other trust shall have an inclusion_ratio of one sec_2642 provides that a severance may be made at any time in this case as of spouse’s death pursuant to the terms of article sec_5 and of trust family_trust consists of the assets contributed to the trust by decedent assets from marital trust a and assets from marital trust b based upon the facts submitted and the representations made family_trust does not have a zero inclusion_ratio for gst tax purposes accordingly the trustee of family_trust intends to sever family_trust into two separate trusts having the same terms as family_trust in accordance with the provisions of state statute since the terms of the two separate resulting trusts will be identical to family trust's terms the terms of the two resulting trusts in the aggregate will provide for the same succession of interests of beneficiaries as are provided in family_trust in addition it is represented that family_trust s assets will be divided on a pro-rata fractional basis between the two resulting trusts one trust will receive a fractional share of the total value of all family_trust s assets equal to the applicable_fraction of the single trust that would be gst tax exempt immediately before the severance gst exempt family_trust and the other resulting trust will receive family_trust s remaining assets gst non-exempt family_trust accordingly based upon the facts submitted and the representations made we conclude that the proposed division of family_trust into two resulting trusts the gst exempt family_trust and the gst non-exempt family_trust will be a qualified_severance within the meaning ' a the gst exempt family_trust will have an inclusion_ratio of zero and the gst non-exempt family_trust will have an inclusion_ratio of one the rulings contained in this letter are based upon information and representations submitted and accompanied by a penalty of perjury statement executed by an appropriate party while this office has not verified any of the material submitted in support of the request for rulings it is subject_to verification on examination except as expressly provided herein no opinion is expressed or implied concerning the tax consequences of any aspect of any transaction or item discussed or referenced in this letter specifically no opinion is expressed or implied regarding the value of the assets of family_trust marital trust a marital trust b or the value of the estates of decedent and spouse for federal transfer_tax purposes plr-164117-03 this ruling is directed only to the taxpayer requesting it sec_6110 provides that it may not be used or cited as precedent in accordance with the power_of_attorney on file with this office a copy of this letter is being sent to your authorized representative sincerely james f hogan james f hogan senior technician reviewer branch passthroughs special industries enclosures copy for ' purposes one copy of this letter cc ---------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------- --------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ---------------------------


department of the treasury internal_revenue_service tax_exempt_and_government_entities_division te_ge eo examinations commerce street dallas texas march number release date legend org name of org address address of org year xx form tax period uil person to contact employee id telephone number fax number dear in a determination_letter dated date you were held to be exempt from federal_income_tax under sec_501 of the internal_revenue_code the code based on recent information received we have determined you have not operated in accordance with the provisions of sec_501 of the code accordingly your exemption from federal_income_tax is revoked effective january 20xx this is a final adverse determination_letter with regard to your status under sec_501 of the code we previously provided you a report of examination explaining why we believe revocation of your exempt status is necessary at that time we informed you of your right to contact the taxpayer_advocate as well as your appeal rights on november 20xx you signed form 6018-a consent to proposed action agreeing to the revocation of your exempt status under sec_501 of the code you are required to file federal_income_tax returns for the tax periods shown above if you have not yet filed these returns please file them with the ogden service_center within days from the date of this letter unless a request for an extension of time is granted or unless an examiner’s report for income_tax_liability was issued to you with other instructions file returns for later tax years with the appropriate service_center indicated in the instructions for those returns you have the right to contact the office_of_the_taxpayer_advocate taxpayer_advocate assistance is not a substitute for established irs procedures such as the formal appeals process the taxpayer_advocate cannot reverse a legally correct_tax determination or extend the time fixed by law that you have to file a petition in a united_states court the taxpayer_advocate can however see that a tax matter that may not have been resolved through normal channels gets prompt and proper handling you may call toll-free and ask for taxpayer_advocate assistance if you prefer you many contact your local taxpayer_advocate at taxpayer_advocate services if you have any questions please contact the person whose name and telephone number are shown at the beginning of this letter sincerely nanette m downing acting director eo examinations internal_revenue_service date date legend org name of organization address address of organization oo year xx org address certified mail - return receipt requested dear department of the treasury eo examinations mc commerce street dallas tx taxpayer_identification_number form tax_year s ended person to contact id number contact numbers telephone fax we have enclosed a copy of our report of examination explaining why we believe revocation of your organization's exempt status is necessary if you do not agree with our position you may appeal your case the enclosed publication the examination process explains how to appeal an internal_revenue_service irs decision publication also includes information on your rights as a taxpayer and the irs collection process if you request a conference we will forward your written_statement of protest to the appeals_office and they will contact you for your convenience an envelope is enclosed if you and appeals do not agree on some or all of the issues after your appeals_conference or if you do not request an appeals_conference you may file suit in united_states tax_court the united_states court of federal claims or united_states district_court after satisfying procedural and jurisdictional requirements as described in publication letter rev catalog number 34801v you may also request that we refer this matter for technical_advice as explained in publication exempt_organization appeal procedures for unagreed issues if a determination_letter is issued to you based on technical_advice no further administrative appeal is available to you within the irs on the issue that was the subject of the technical_advice if you accept our findings please sign and return the enclosed form_6018 consent to proposed adverse action we will then send you a final letter revoking your exempt status if we do not hear from you within days from the date of this letter we will process your case on the basis of the recommendations shown in the report of examination and this letter will become final in that event you will be required to file federal_income_tax returns for the tax period s shown above file these returns with the ogden service_center within days from the date of this letter unless a request for an extension of time is granted file returns for later tax years with the appropriate service_center indicated in the instructions for those returns you have the right to contact the office_of_the_taxpayer_advocate taxpayer_advocate assistance is not a substitute for established irs procedures such as the formal appeals process the taxpayer_advocate cannot reverse a legally correct_tax determination or extend the time fixed by law that you have to file a petition in a united_states court the taxpayer_advocate can however see that a tax matter that may not have been resolved through normal channels gets prompt and proper handling you may call toll-free and ask for taxpayer_advocate assistance if you prefer you may contact your local taxpayer_advocate at office_of_the_taxpayer_advocate telephone fax if you have any questions please call the contact person at the telephone number shown in the heading of this letter if you write please provide a telephone number and the most convenient time to call if we need to contact you thank you for your cooperation sincerely sunita lough director eo examinations enclosures publication publication form_6018 report of examination envelope letter rev catalog number 34801v schedule number or exhibit form 886-a rev date explanation of item sec_12 xx xx tax identification_number year period ended name of taxpayer org legend org name of organization state name of state year xx issue whether org club qualifies for exemption under sec_501 of the internal_revenue_code facts org was incorporated in the state in july 19xx the org club is recognized by the internal_revenue_service as a tax-exempt_organization under c effective june 19xx the org club is a member social_club which encourages hunting fishing and sportsmanship among its members the club maintains a lodge area for members to use for recreational purposes such as relaxing fishing hunting and boating each member is required to pay a dollar_figure per year membership fee along with volunteering a minimum of hours or contributing the hourly assessment toward lodge upkeep and fund-raising activities in addition the org club sponsors the lake kids fish derby and a fish derby for handicap children the club uses volunteer labor to run fund-raisers such as a crab feed steak feed and beer booth at the county fair and the big horse classic which are open to the general_public upon examination it was determined that non-member gross_receipts from the above activities which were open to the public exceeded in 20xx 20xx and 20xx this conclusion was based on the following gross_receipts obtained from the org club's forms 20xx dollar_figure 20xx dollar_figure 20xx dollar_figure member non-member investment law sec_501 c exempts from tax clubs organized for pleasure recreation and other non-profitable purposes substantially_all of the activities of which are for such purposes and no part of the net_earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder sec_1_501_c_7_-1 states that if a social_club makes its social and recreational facilities available to the general_public it will not qualify for tax-exempt status public law senate report no 2d session c b state that it is intended that social clubs should be permitted to receive up to percent of their gross_receipts including investment_income from sources outside of their memberships without losing their exempt status within thi sec_35 percent amount not more than percent of the gross_receipts should be derived from the use of a social club's facilities or services by the general_public this means that an exempt social_club may receive up to percent of its gross_receipts from a combination of investment_income and receipts from non-members so long as the latter do not represent more than percent of total receipts taxpayer’s position discussed the determination with cpa the org club's power_of_attorney government’s position publish no irs gov department of the treasury-internal revenue service form 886-a catalog number 20810w page schedule number or exhibit form 886-a explanation of items rev date tax identification_number year period ended name of taxpayer xx xx org based on public law social clubs are only permitted to receive up to percent of their gross_receipts including investment_income from sources outside of their memberships without losing their exempt status the organization failed to qualify as a c based on the fact that non-member revenues exceeded the above percentage during each of three years 20xx non-member income 20xx non-member income and 20xx non- member income conclusion it is the irs's position that the organization failed to meet the requirements regarding non-member receipts under sec_501 to be recognized as exempt from federal_income_tax under sec_501 accordingly the organization's exempt status is revoked effective january 20xx form_1120 returns should be filed for the tax periods ending december 20xx to the present page publish no irs gov department of the treasury-internal revenue service form 886-a catalog number 20810w


internal_revenue_service index number 468a 468a department of the treasury washington dc person to contact telephone number refer reply to cc dqm p si date s p plr-113013-99 re request for a revised schedule of ruling amounts o o w t d d u w taxpayer parent plant location commission a commission b district fund dear this letter responds to the request of taxpayer dated date fora revised schedule of ruling amounts in accordance with sec_1_468a-3 of the income_tax regulations taxpayer was previously granted a revised schedule of ruling amounts on date information for the schedule of ruling amounts was submitted on behalf of the taxpayer pursuant to sec_1_468a-3 taxpayer represents the facts and information relating to its request for a revised schedule of ruling amounts as follows taxpayer is percent owned by parent and files a consolidated federal_income_tax return with parent taxpayer has a direct ownership_interest of as a tenant-in-common with other electric utility companies in plant which is situated at location percent d taxpayer is under the audit jurisdiction of the district_director of district plant's taxpayer is subject_to the jurisdiction of commission percent of the taxpayer's total electric sales and commission b operating license expires in awhich covers percent these percentages may vary which covers slightly from year to year the estimated base cost for decommissioning the plant is based on an independent study and is premised on the prompt removal immediate dismantiement method percent for a total of commission a in docket no effective authorized nuclear decommissioning costs to be included in the taxpayer's cost of service for ratemaking purposes for the plant in the amount of tax_rate of return on assets of estimated cost of decommissioning to be escalated using an estimated inflation rate of decommissioning cost of after taking into consideration the tax and investment changes made to sec_468a of the internal_revenue_code made by of the energy policy act of amounts for commission b are not specifically reviewed herein percent results in an estimated future these rates were estimated percent the commission also determined the total and estimated an after- this base cost there are no proceedings pending before either commission a or commission b that may result in an increase or decrease in the amount of decommissioning costs for the plant to be included in taxpayer's cost of service for ratemaking purposes the funding_period and level_funding limitation period for the plant extends from the estimated period for which the fund will be in effect is the estimated_useful_life of the plant is pursuant to sec_1_468a-8 of the regulations the qualifying percentage is based upon the percentage of the remained to be recovered as of date the amount of the original depreciation costs is date is percentage to be thus the taxpayer calculated its qualifying and the amount remaining to be recovered as of vintage depreciation costs that percent sec_468a of the internal_revenue_code provides that a taxpayer may elect to deduct the amount of payments made to a qualified nuclear decommissioning fund however sec_468a limits the amount_paid into the fund for any taxable_year to the lesser_of the amount of nuclear decommissioning costs allocable to the fund that is included in the taxpayer's cost of service for ratemaking purposes for the taxable_year or the ruling_amount applicable to that year sec_468a of the code provides that no deduction shall be allowed for any payment to the nuclear decommissioning fund unless the taxpayer requests and receives from the secretary a schedule of ruling amounts the ruling_amount for any taxable_year is defined under sec_468a as the amount which the secretary determines to be necessary to fund that portion of nuclear decommissioning costs which bears the same ratio to the nuclear power plant as the period for which the fund is in effect bears to the estimated_useful_life of the plant this term is further defined to include the amount necessary to prevent excessive funding of nuclear decommissioning costs or funding of these costs at a rate more rapid than level_funding taking into account such discount rates as the secretary deems appropriate sec_468a of the code provides that a taxpayer shall be deemed to have made a payment to the nuclear decommissioning fund on the last day of the taxable_year if the payment is made on account of the taxable_year within months after the close of the taxable_year sec_1_468a-1 of the regulations provides that an eligible_taxpayer may elect to deduct nuclear decommissioning costs under sec_468a of the code an eligible_taxpayer as defined under sec_1_468a-1 is a taxpayer that has a qualifying interest in a nuclear power plant as defined under sec_1_468a-1 a qualifying interest is among other things a direct ownership_interest including an interest held as a tenant in common or joint tenant sec_1_468a-2 of the regulations provides that the maximum amount of cash payments made or deemed made to a nuclear decommissioning fund during any taxable_year shall not exceed the lesser_of i the cost of service amount applicable to the nuclear decommissioning fund for such taxable_year or ii the ruling_amount applicable to the nuclear decommissioning fund for such taxable_year sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that in general a schedule of ruling amounts for a nuclear decommissioning fund is a ruling specifying annual payments that over the taxable years remaining in the funding_period as of the date the schedule first applies will result in a projected balance of the nuclear decommissioning fund as of the last day of the funding_period equal to and in no event more than the amount of decommissioning costs allocable to the fund sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that each schedule of ruling amounts shall be based on the reasonable assumptions and determinations used by the applicable public_utility commission s in establishing or approving the amount of decommissioning costs to be included in the cost of service for ratemaking purposes taking into account amounts that are otherwise required to be included in the taxpayer's income under sec_88 of the code and the regulations thereunder each schedule of ruling amounts shall be based on the public_utility commission's reasonable assumptions concerning i the after-tax rate of return to be earned by the amounts collected for decommissioning ii the total estimated cost of decommissioning the nuclear power plant and iii the frequency of contributions to the nuclear decommissioning fund for a taxable_year of sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations requires the internal_revenue_service to provide a schedule of ruling amounts that is identical to the schedule proposed by the taxpayer but no such schedule shall be provided by the service unless the taxpayer's proposed schedule is consistent with the principles and provisions of this section sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that the ruling_amount specified in a schedule of ruling amounts for any taxable_year in the level_funding limitation period shail not be less than the ruling_amount specified in such schedule for any earlier taxable_year under sec_1_468a-3 the level_funding limitation period begins on the first day of the first taxable_year for which a deductible payment is made to the nuclear decommissioning fund and ends on the last day of the taxable_year that includes the estimated date on which the nuclear power plant will no longer be included in the taxpayer's rate base for ratemaking purposes sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that the funding_period for a nuclear decommissioning fund is the period that begins on the first day of the first taxable_year for which a deductible payment is made or deemed to be made to such nuclear decommissioning fund and ends the later of i the last day of the taxable_year that includes the estimated date on which decommissioning costs of the nuclear power plant to which the nuclear decommissioning fund relates will no longer be included in the taxpayer's cost of service for ratemaking purposes or ii the last day of the taxable_year that includes the estimated date on which the nuclear power plant to which the nuclear decommissioning fund relates will no longer be included in the taxpayer's rate base for ratemaking purposes sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that the amount of decommissioning costs allocable to a nuclear decommissioning fund is the taxpayer's share of the total estimated cost of decommissioning the nuclear power plant multiplied by the qualifying percentage sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that in general the total estimated cost of decommissioning a nuclear power plant is the reasonably estimated cost of decommissioning used by the applicable public_utility commission in establishing or approving the amount of these costs to be included in cost of service for ratemaking purposes sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that a taxpayer's share of the total estimated cost of decommissioning a nuclear power plant equals the total estimated cost of decommissioning the plant multiplied by the taxpayer's qualifying interest in the plant sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that the qualifying percentage for any nuclear decommissioning fund is equal to the fraction the numerator of which is the number of taxable years in the estimated period for which the nuclear decommissioning fund is to be in effect and the denominator of which is the number of taxable years in the estimated_useful_life of the applicable nuclear power plant sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that the estimated period for which a nuclear decommissioning fund is to be in effect begins on the later of the first day of the first taxable_year for which a deductible payment is made to the nuclear decommissioning fund or deemed made or the first day of the taxable_year that includes the date that the nuclear power plant begins commercial operations as determined by the applicable public_utility commission at the time the plant was first included in the taxpayer's rate base and ends on the last day of the taxable_year that includes the estimated date on which the nuclear power plant will no longer be included in the taxpayer's rate base for ratemaking purposes according to sec_1_468a-3 the estimated date on which the nuclear power plant will no longer be included in the taxpayer's rate base for ratemaking purposes is determined under the ratemaking assumptions used by the applicable public_utility commission in establishing or approving rates during the first ratemaking proceeding in which the nuclear power plant was included in the taxpayer's rate base sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that the estimated_useful_life of a nuclear power plant begins on the first day of the taxable_year that includes the date that the plant begins commercial operations as determined by the applicable public_utility commission at the time the plant was first included in the taxpayer's rate base and ends on the last day of the taxable_year that includes the estimated date on which the nuclear power plant will no longer be included in the taxpayer's rate base for tatemaking purposes according to sec_1_468a-3 the estimated date on which the nuclear power plant will no longer be included in the taxpayer's rate base for ratemaking purposes is determined under the ratemaking assumptions used by the applicable public_utility commission in establishing or approving rates during the first ratemaking proceeding in which the nuclear power plant was included in the taxpayer's rate base sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that if two or more public_utility commissions establish or approve rates for electric energy generated by a single nuclear power plant then the schedule of ruling amounts shall be separately determined pursuant to the rules of sec_1_468a-3 through e for each public_utility commission that has determined the amount of decommissioning costs to be included in the cost of service for ratemaking purposes for this plant under sec_1_468a-3 this separate determination shall be based on the reasonable assumptions and determinations used by the relevant public_utility commission and shall take into account only that portion of the total estimated cost of decommissioning that is properly allocable to the ratepayer whose rates are established or approved by the public_utility o2 y- commission according to sec_1_468a-3 the ruling amounts for any taxable_year is the sum of the ruling amounts for such taxable_year determined under the separate schedules of ruling amounts sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that the internal_revenue_service shall not provide a taxpayer with a schedule of ruling amounts for any nuclear decommissioning fund unless the public_utility commission that establishes or approves the rates for electric energy generated by the plant to which the nuclear decommissioning fund relates has determined the amount of decommissioning costs to be included in the taxpayer's cost of service for ratemaking purposes and has disclosed the after-tax rate of return and any other assumptions and determinations used in establishing or approving the amount sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations enumerates the information required to be contained in a request for a schedule of ruling amounts filed by a taxpayer in order to receive a ruling_amount for any taxable_year sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that a taxpayer is required to request a revised schedule of ruling amounts for a nuclear decommissioning fund if a any public_utility commission that establishes or approves rates for the furnishing or sale of electric energy generated by a nuclear power plant to which the nuclear decommissioning fund relates increases the proposed period over which decommissioning costs of the nuclear power plant will be included in cost of service for ratemaking purposes adjusts the estimated date on which the nuclear power plant will no longer be included in the taxpayer's rate base for ratemaking purposes or reduces the amount of decommissioning costs to be included in cost of service for any taxable_year and b the taxpayer's most recent request for a schedule of ruling amounts did not provide notice to the service of such action by the public_utility commission sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations provides that any taxpayer that has previously obtained a schedule of ruling amounts can request a revised schedule of ruling amounts such a request must be made in accordance with the rules of - sec_1_468a-3 the internal_revenue_service shall not provide a revised schedule of ruling amounts applicable to a taxable_year in response to a request for a schedule of ruling amounts that is filed after the deemed payment deadline date for such taxable_year o2 s -t- we have examined the representations and information submitted by the taxpayer in relation to the requirements set forth in the sec_468a of the code and the regulations thereunder the following conclusions based solely on these representations of the facts we reach taxpayer has a qualifying interest in the plant and is therefore an eligible_taxpayer under sec_1_468a-1 of the regulations commission a has determined the amount of decommissioning costs to be included in the taxpayer's cost of service for ratemaking purposes as required by sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations taxpayer as owner of the plant has calculated its share of the total decommissioning costs under sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations taxpayer has determined that pursuant to sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations the qualifying percentage is percent taxpayer has proposed a schedule of ruling amounts which meets the requirements of sec_1_468a-3 and of the regulations the annual payments specified in the proposed schedule of ruling amounts are based on the reasonable assumptions and determinations used by commission a and will result in a projected fund balance at the end of the funding_period equal to or less than the amount of decommissioning costs allocable to the fund the maximum amount of cash payments made or deemed made to the fund during any taxable_year is restricted to the lesser amount of the decommissioning costs applicable to the fund or the ruling_amount applicable to the fund as set forth under sec_1_468a-2 of the regulations taxpayer subject_to the jurisdiction of two public_utility commissions for ratemaking purposes has calculated its share of the total allocable decommissioning costs as required by sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations based on the above determinations we conclude that the taxpayer's proposed schedule of ruling amounts satisfies the requirements of sec_468a of the code b approved schedule of ruling amounts taxable years commissions a and b year comm a comm b' total approval of the schedule of ruling amounts is contingent on there being no change in the facts and circumstances known or assumed at the time this ruling is issued if any of the events described in sec_1_468a-3 iii of the regulations occur in future years the taxpayer must request a review and revision of the schedule of ruling amounts generally the taxpayer is required to file such a request on or before the deemed payment deadline date for the first taxable_year in which the rates reflecting such action became effective when no such event occurs the taxpayer must file a request for a revised schedule of ruling amounts on or before the deemed payment deadline of the tenth taxable_year following the close of the tax_year in which the most recent schedule of ruling amounts was received the approved schedule of ruling amounts is relevant only to those payments made to the fund payments allocable to any funds other than the fund cannot qualify for purposes of the deduction under the provisions of sec_468a of the code as stated above payments made to the fund can qualify only to the extent that they do not exceed the lesser_of the decommissioning costs applicable to the fund or the ruling amounts applicable to the fund in the taxable_year amounts for commission b are not specifically reviewed herein and are merely reprinted to arrive at the amount for the total annual ruling_amount for purposes of the review and revision under sec_1_468a-3 of the regulations the date of the schedule of ruling amounts approved by the service on date governs the review period for the commission b ruling amounts ol7 this letter_ruling is directed only to the taxpayer who requested it sec_6110 of the code provides that this ruling may not be used or cited as precedent pursuant to the power_of_attorney on file with this office the original of this letter is being sent to the authorized legal_representative pursuant to sec_1_468a-7 of the regulations a copy of this letter must be attached with the required election statement to the taxpayer's federal_income_tax return for each taxable_year in which the taxpayer claims a deduction for payments made to the fund sincerely yours peter c friedman assistant to the branch chief branch office of the assistant chief_counsel passthroughs and special industries enclosure copy aip


significant index number department of the treasury internal_revenue_service washington d c tax_exempt_and_government_entities_division jan j tep ek al re taxpayer dear this letter constitutes notice that approval has been granted for your request for a 5-year automatic_extension for amortizing the unfunded liabilities as of date for the above-named plan which are described in sec_431 and sec_431 of the internal_revenue_code code and sec_304 and sec_304 of the employee_retirement_income_security_act_of_1974 erisa this extension is effective with the plan_year beginning date this extension applies to the eligible amortization charge bases established as of date the extension of the amortization periods of the unfunded liabilities of the plan was granted in accordance with sec_431 of the code sec_431 of the code requires the secretary to extend the period of time required to amortize any unfunded_liability of a plan for a period of time not in excess of years if the plan submits an application meeting the criteria stated in sec_431 the plan has submitted the required information to meet the criteria in sec_431 including a certification from the plan’s actuary that i absent the extension under subparagraph a the plan would have an accumulated_funding_deficiency in the current plan_year or any of the succeeding plan years ii the plan_sponsor has adopted a plan to improve the plan's funding status iii the plan is projected to have sufficient assets to timely pay expected benefits and anticipated expenditures over the amortization period as extended and iv the notice required under paragraph a has been provided we have sent a copy of this letter to the and to the this ruling is directed only to the taxpayer that requested it sec_6110 of the internal_revenue_code provides that it may not be used or cited by others as precedent if you require further assistance in this matter please contact sincerely yours er oho david m ziegler manager ep actuarial group


internal_revenue_service department of the treasury number release date index number washington dc person to contact telephone number refer reply to cc psi plr-133246-02 date date legend x a b c state d1 dear this letter responds to a letter dated date by your authorized representative on behalf of x requesting a ruling under sec_1362 of the internal_revenue_code facts x was incorporated under state law on d1 x's sole shareholders a b and c decided that x would be an s_corporation however due to inadvertence x's form_2553 election by a small_business_corporation with an effective date of d1 was not filed timely plr-133246-02 x requests a ruling under sec_1362 that its sec_1362 election will be treated as timely made for its taxable_year that began on d1 law and analysis sec_1362 provides that a small_business_corporation may elect to be an s_corporation sec_1362 provides the rule on when an s election will be effective generally if an s election is made within the first two and one-half months of a corporation's taxable_year then the corporation will be treated as an s_corporation for the year in which the election is made sec_1362 provides that if an s election is made after the first two and one-half months of a corporation's taxable_year then the corporation will not be treated as an s_corporation until the taxable_year after the year in which the s election is made sec_1362 provides that if an election under sec_1362 is made for any taxable_year after the date prescribed by sec_1362 for making the election for the taxable_year or no sec_1362 election is made for any taxable_year and the secretary determines that there was reasonable_cause for the failure to timely make the election then the secretary may treat the election as timely made for such taxable_year and sec_1362 shall not apply conclusion based on the facts submitted and representations made we conclude that x has established reasonable_cause for its failing to make a timely s election and that x is eligible for relief under sec_1362 accordingly if x makes an election to be an s_corporation by filing with the appropriate service_center a completed form_2553 containing an effective date of d1 for the election within days following the date of this letter then such election will be treated as timely made a copy of this letter should be attached to the form_2553 filed with the service_center a copy is enclosed for that purpose except as expressly provided herein we express or imply no opinion concerning the federal tax consequences of any aspect of any transaction or item discussed or referenced in this letter specifically we express or imply no opinion concerning whether x is an s_corporation for federal tax purposes pursuant to a power_of_attorney on file with this office we are sending a copy of this letter to x's authorized representative plr-133246-02 this ruling is directed only to the taxpayer who requested it sec_6110 of the code provides that it may not be used or cited as precedent sincerely s jeanne sullivan senior technician reviewer branch office of the associate chief_counsel passthroughs and special industries enclosures copy of this letter copy for sec_6110 purposes


internal_revenue_service number release date index number ------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- ---------------------- -------------------------- legend department of the treasury washington dc third party communication none date of communication not applicable_person to contact --------------------------- id no ------------- telephone number --------------------- refer reply to cc psi b01 plr-142768-11 date date x --------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- state d1 d2 ------------- ----------------------- ----------------------- dear ------------- this responds to a letter dated date submitted on behalf of x requesting relief under sec_1362 of the internal_revenue_code facts according to the information submitted x was incorporated on d1 under the laws of state x intended to be treated as an s_corporation effective d2 but the form_2553 election by a small_business_corporation was not timely filed accordingly x requests a ruling that it will be treated as an s_corporation effective d2 law and analysis sec_1362 provides that a small_business_corporation may elect to be an s_corporation sec_1362 provides the rule on when an s election will be effective sec_1362 provides that if an s election is made within the first two and one-half months of a corporation’s taxable_year then the corporation will be treated as an s_corporation plr-142768-11 for the year in which the election is made sec_1362 provides that if the election is made after the first two and one-half months of a corporation’s taxable_year then the corporation will not be treated as an s_corporation until the taxable_year after the year in which the s election is made sec_1362 provides that if no election is made pursuant to sec_1362 or if made the election is made after the date prescribed for making such an election and the secretary determines there was reasonable_cause for the failure to timely make the election then the secretary may treat such election as timely made for such taxable_year and effective as of the first day of that year x did not file a timely election to be treated as an s_corporation under sec_1362 effective d2 x has however established reasonable_cause for not making a timely election and is entitled to relief under sec_1362 conclusion based solely on the facts submitted and representations made and provided that x otherwise qualifies as a subchapter_s_corporation we conclude that x will be recognized as an s_corporation effective d2 if within days from the date of this letter x submits a properly completed form_2553 with a copy of this letter attached to the appropriate service_center except as expressly provided herein no opinion is expressed or implied concerning the tax consequences of any aspect of any transaction or item discussed or referenced in this letter specifically no opinion is expressed or implied concerning whether x otherwise qualifies as an s_corporation for federal tax purposes this rule is directed only to the taxpayer requesting it sec_6110 provides that it may not be used or cited as precedent in accordance with the power_of_attorney on file with this office a copy of this letter is being sent to the taxpayer’s authorized representative sincerely laura c fields laura c fields senior technical reviewer office of the associate chief_counsel passthroughs special industries enclosures copy of this letter copy of this letter for sec_6110 purposes cc


department of the treasury internal_revenue_service washington d c tax_exempt_and_government_entities_division uniform issue list jun thats legend company a company b partnership c company d date h date j ira y ira x date l date k amount j this is in response to your request dated date submitted by your authorized representative for a ruling to waive the 60-day rollover requirement contained in sec_408 of the internal_revenue_code the ‘code correspondence dated date supplemented the request dear page under penalty of perjury you have submitted the following facts and representations you are years of age and represent that you received a distribution of amount j from ira x you assert that your failure to accomplish a rollover within the 60-day period prescribed by sec_408 of the code was due to a mistake made by company b and company d which led to amount j being placed into a non-ira account you further represent that amount j has not been used for any other purpose you maintained ira x with company a on date h you authorized your investment_advisor company d to liquidate a portion of the shares in ira x held at company a on date j amount j was transferred from ira x to company b with the intent of purchasing an interest in partnership c an ira with company b it was your intent that the funds were to be held in because of company b and company d errors the newly purchased interest in partnership c was not held by a qualified ira custodian nor was an ira opened documentation submitted by you including statements received from company b and a schedule_k-1 issued to you which reflected that your investment was being held in an ira demonstrates that at all times both you and company d believed your funds were validly invested in an ira it was not until date k that you learned that amount j was not held in an ira on date l you transferred your entire_interest into ira y based on the facts and representations you request that the internal_revenue_service waive the day rollover requirement with respect to the distribution from ira x with respect to your ruling_request sec_408 of the code provides that except as otherwise provided in sec_408 any amount_paid or distributed out of an ira shall be - included in gross_income by the payee or distributee as the case may be in the manner provided under sec_72 of the code sec_408 of the code defines and provides the rules applicable to ira_rollovers sec_408 of the code provides that sec_408 of the code does not apply to any amount_paid or distributed out of an ira to the individual for whose benefit the ira is maintained if i the entire amount received including money and any other_property is paid into an ira for the benefit of such individual not later than the 60th day after the day on which the individual receives the payment or distribution or ii the entire amount received including money and any other_property is paid into an eligible_retirement_plan other than an ira for the benefit of such individual not later than the 60th day after the date on which the payment or distribution is received except that the maximum amount which may be paid into such plan may not exceed the portion of the amount received which is includible in gross_income determined without regard to sec_408 sec_408 of the code provides that sec_408 does not apply to any amount described in sec_408 received by an individual from an ira if at any page time during the 1-year period ending on the day of such receipt such individual received any other amount described in sec_408 from an ira which was not includible in gross_income because of the application of sec_408 sec_408 of the code provides a similar 60-day rollover period for partial rollovers sec_408 of the code provides that the rollover provisions of sec_408 do not apply to any amount required to be distributed under sec_408 sec_408 of the code provides that the secretary may waive the 60-day requirement under sec_408 and sec_408 of the code where the failure to waive such requirement would be against equity or good conscience including casualty disaster or other events beyond the reasonable control of the individual subject_to such requirement only distributions that occurred after date are eligible for the waiver under sec_408 of the code revproc_2003_16 2003_4_irb_359 date provides that in determining whether to grant a waiver of the 60-day rollover requirement pursuant to sec_408 the service will consider all relevant facts and circumstances including errors committed by a financial_institution inability to complete a rollover due to death disability hospitalization incarceration restrictions imposed by a foreign_country or postal error the use of the amount distributed for example in the case of payment by check whether the check was cashed and the time elapsed since the distribution occurred the information presented and documentation submitted by you is consistent with your assertion that your failure to accomplish a timely rollover was caused by mistakes made by company b and company d which led to amount j being placed into a non-ira account the information presented by you is consistent with your assertion that you attempted to rollover amount j therefore pursuant to sec_408 of the code the service waives the 60-day rollover requirement with respect to the distribution of amount j from ira x provided all other requirements of sec_408 of the code except the 60-day requirement are met with respect to amount j the transfer of such amount into ira y on date l will be considered a rollover_contribution within the meaning of sec_408 d of the code no opinion is expressed as to the tax treatment of the transaction described herein under the provisions of any other section of either the code or regulations which may be applicable thereto this letter is directed only to the taxpayer who requested it sec_6110 of the code provides that it may not be used or cited as precedent a copy of this letter has been sent to your authorized representative in accordance with a power_of_attorney on file in this office page 2vvu73 if you wish to inquire about this ruling please contact dd please address all correspondence to se t ep ra t3 at sincerely yours rances v sloan ager employee plang technical group enclosures deleted copy of ruling letter notice of intention to disclose cc


number release date id office uilc cca-819100-08 -------------- from ------------------- sent tuesday date am to ------------------- cc subject re ogden processing concern ------ i think you had it right in your initial response - as i understand it the final judgment amount exceeds the original assessment the judgment will be final days after entry assuming neither party appeals which i assume will not happen here subsequent to that date although there is no fixed time for doing so it should be done as soon as possible the irs should do a partial abatement that is the irs should abate any assessment amount that exceeds the original assessment - the result being that the resulting assessment amount still on the books for -------will be equal to the judgment amount - which will presumably be satisfied when -------makes payment -------- -------------------- ------------------- ------------------------------------ ---------------------------------- ------------ ------------------------------- --------------------------------


t c memo united_states tax_court barbara a landreth petitioner v commissioner of internal revenue respondent docket no filed date thomas e carew and charles fancher jenson for petitioner charles j graves for respondent memorandum opinion carluzzo special_trial_judge this case was heard pursuant to the provisions of sec_7443a and rule sec_180 sec_181 and sec_182 unless otherwise indicated all section references are to the internal_revenue_code in effect for the year at issue all rule references are to the tax_court rules_of_practice and procedure respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner's federal_income_tax in the amount of dollar_figure the issue for decision is whether cash payments received by petitioner in from her spouse must be included in her income for that year as alimony or separate_maintenance the resolution of this issue depends upon whether an entry made by a judge on the docket sheet relating to a state court domestic relations matter constitutes a divorce_or_separation_instrument within the meaning of sec_71 background some of the facts have been stipulated and they are so found at the time of the filing of the petition petitioner resided in joplin missouri petitioner first married edward h landreth mr landreth on date at the time she had three children from previous marriages including a son christopher kyle beeler kyle petitioner and mr landreth divorced in sometime in petitioner and mr landreth remarried on date petitioner filed a petition for dissolution of her second marriage to mr landreth in the circuit_court of jasper county missouri the circuit_court in connection with that proceeding on date petitioner filed a motion pendente lite for temporary maintenance and attorney's_fees and costs the motion prior to a hearing on the motion charles buchanan her attorney in that proceeding spoke to mr landreth's attorneys although the details of the conversation or conversations between these attorneys are unclear they discussed the motion and apparently agreed presumably with the consent of their respective clients that mr landreth would pay petitioner dollar_figure per month as temporary maintenance the attorneys also discussed health_insurance_coverage for petitioner and kyle and petitioner's use of an automobile owned or controlled by mr landreth on date a hearing on the motion was held before judge richard copeland there is no transcript of the hearing the following docket sheet entry regarding the motion was handwritten by judge copeland on the date of the hearing pet appears by charles buchanan per agreement pet motion for temporary maintenance is sustained respondent ordered to pay the sum of dollar_figure mo to pet as for temporary maintenance pet withdraws motion for temporary att fees the docket sheet entry is neither signed nor initialed by judge copeland mr landreth began making temporary maintenance payments of dollar_figure per month to petitioner after the date docket sheet entry had been made he did not make any temporary maintenance payments to petitioner prior to the date of the hearing since date and through the date of trial mr landreth has paid for health_insurance_coverage for petitioner and kyle in addition mr landreth allowed petitioner to use an automobile that he owned or controlled mr landreth paid kyle's private high school tuition he contributed to kyle's checking account paid kyle's credit card bills and paid for some of kyle's vacations none of these items were addressed in the docket sheet entry a supplemental motion for temporary maintenance was filed on petitioner's behalf by mr buchanan on date in the supplemental motion petitioner represented that she previously filed a motion for temporary maintenance and the court entered its order granting her dollar_figure per month on date mr landreth filed a motion to terminate or reduce spousal support petitioner and mr landreth lived separate and apart but remained married throughout during that year petitioner received dollar_figure monthly payments of dollar_figure from mr landreth on her federal_income_tax return petitioner did not include any of the dollar_figure she received from mr landreth in her income in the notice_of_deficiency respondent determined that the dollar_figure petitioner received from mr landreth constituted alimony or separate_maintenance and adjusted her income accordingly explaining in order for the income to be tax free to you it would have had to have been so stated in the temporary support order discussion sec_61 defines gross_income to mean income from whatever source derived including alimony or separate_maintenance payments sec_61 whether a payment constitutes alimony or separate_maintenance within the meaning of sec_61 is determined by reference to sec_71 pursuant to sec_71 a payment is alimony if in addition to meeting other requirements the payment is received by or on behalf of a spouse under_a_divorce_or_separation_instrument sec_71 for purposes relevant to the present dispute the term divorce_or_separation_instrument means a decree requiring a spouse to pay for the support or maintenance of the other spouse sec_71 a decree for support includes any type of court order or decree including an interlocutory decree of divorce or a decree of alimony pendente lite requiring one spouse to make payments for the other spouse's support or maintenance sec_1 b income_tax regs the dispute in this case focuses upon whether the docket sheet entry constitutes a decree within the meaning of sec_71 that required mr landreth to make support payments to petitioner the parties agree that missouri law controls the resolution of this dispute a review of the relevant missouri statutes and procedural rules reveals that the terms order and judgment rather than decree are used we are satisfied that an order or judgment that is issued by a missouri court constitutes a decree which is defined by black's law dictionary 6th ed as follows the judgment of a court of equity or chancery answering for most purposes to the judgment of a court of law a decree in equity is a sentence or order of the court pronounced on hearing and understanding all the points in issue and determining the rights of all the parties to the suit according to equity and good conscience it is a declaration of the court announcing the legal consequences of the facts found with the procedural merger of law and equity in the federal and most state courts under the rules of civil procedure the term judgment has generally replaced decree citations omitted accordingly we consider whether the docket sheet entry is either a valid order or judgment pursuant to missouri law in missouri a judgment is the final_determination of the rights of the parties in the action mo ann stat sec_511 west an order is every direction of a court or judge made or entered in writing and not included in a judgment an application_for an order is a motion mo ann stat sec_506 west in missouri a request for relief pendente lite is in the nature of an independent cause of action tate v tate s w 2d mo ct app an order granting relief pendente lite is in the nature of a final judgment from which an appeal may be taken huska v huska s w 2d mo ct app tzinberg v tzinberg s w 2d mo ct app in re marriage of deatherage s w 2d mo ct app when a missouri court does not render a judgment in the form of a separate document signed by the judge and entered by the clerk the docket sheet entry may be examined to determine what order or judgment if any the court rendered byrd v brown s w 2d mo ct app where it is clear that a missouri judge intended a docket sheet entry to be a determination of the rights of the parties to the action and shows in intelligible language the relief granted the docket sheet entry may be considered the order or judgment id according to petitioner the docket sheet entry is neither a valid missouri judgment nor order because it lacks the requisite specificity to be enforced and the entry was not signed by judge copeland petitioner further argues that the payments were not made pursuant to the docket sheet entry but rather pursuant to an unwritten agreement between petitioner and mr landreth either way according to petitioner the payments were not made pursuant to a divorce or separate_maintenance instrument and do not constitute alimony within the meaning of sec_61 and sec_71 the docket sheet entry identifies petitioner's motion for temporary maintenance and reflects the appearance of counsel it also indicates the action taken ie that mr landreth was ordered to pay petitioner dollar_figure per month for temporary maintenance and that petitioner had withdrawn her motion for attorney fees although unsigned it was handwritten by the judge before whom the motion was presented the docket sheet entry did not include a directive to the parties to prepare a written order or judgment for subsequent execution and entry and thus there is no indication that the judge did not intend it to be a final_determination of the rights of the parties with respect to the motion see grantham v shelter mutual ins co s w 2d mo ct app munn v garrett s w 2d mo ct app orgill bros co inc v rhodes s w 2d mo ct app the docket sheet entry is a determination of the rights of petitioner and mr landreth with respect to the motion and shows the relief granted in intelligible language consequently it satisfies the requirements set forth in byrd v brown supra we therefore reject petitioner's argument that the docket sheet entry lacked the requisite specificity to be considered an order or judgment petitioner's argument regarding the consequence of the judge's failure to sign or initial the entry is also rejected although the current version of the relevant missouri rule_of civil procedure requires the signature of a judge on a judgement or order the version in effect at the time that the docket sheet entry was made did not compare mo ct c p r dollar_figure west with mo ct c p r dollar_figure west the docket sheet entry is specific enough to be considered a judgment or order of the circuit_court and the failure of the judge to sign the entry does not render it invalid see byrd v brown supra as a valid judgment or order under missouri law the docket sheet entry constitutes a decree for purposes of sec_71 it follows and we so hold that the dollar_figure petitioner received from mr landreth during pursuant to the decree constitutes alimony or separate_maintenance and must be included in her income in arriving at our holding we have considered petitioner's additional arguments that the docket sheet entry is not a decree because it does not contain the necessary findings under mo ann stat sec_452 west and the docket sheet entry merely records an oral agreement between mr landreth and petitioner and we find such arguments to be without merit with respect to the former we note that the cited statute does not require the judge to include the required findings in a maintenance order rather the statute merely requires that certain findings must be made prior to granting a maintenance order in support of the latter argument petitioner suggests that because mr landreth provided other_benefits to petitioner outside of the terms of the decree all of the benefits she received from mr landreth including the dollar_figure monthly cash payments must have been made pursuant to something other than a decree from the circuit_court we disagree the decree might have been based upon the agreement between petitioner and mr landreth but it was a decree that ordered the payments nonetheless respondent has not taken the position that the other_benefits conferred upon petitioner by mr landreth pursuant to an oral agreement or otherwise must be included in her income under sec_71 moreover petitioner's argument on this point is undermined by actions taken by petitioner and mr landreth subsequent to the docket sheet entry that demonstrate they considered the docket sheet entry to be the source of mr landreth's obligation to make the payments here under consideration to reflect the foregoing decision will be entered for respondent


number internal_revenue_service release date te_ge technical_advice_memorandum area director area tege appeals los angeles ca jan uil taxpayer's name taxpayer's address taxpayer's id no year s involved conference held legend taxpayer issue whether the commissioner te_ge should exercise discretion to grant the taxpayer relief under sec_7805 of the internal_revenue_code to limit the retroactive effect of revocation of its exempt status under sec_501 facts application_for exemption taxpayer then operating under a different name incorporated as a non-profit in to provide credit_counseling_services to the public the following year taxpayer applied for exempt status describing its activities on the form_1023 as credit rebuilding removal of negative inaccurate information on credit reports debt consolidation negotiating with creditors to reduce payments interest charges re-age accounts counseling clients as to budgeting their income and paying their bills in a timely manner and distributing a monthly newsletter taxpayer used a proprietary software program developed by its president and licensed from a for- profit entity owned by him it also executed a marketing agreement’ with this for-profit entity to supply a number of services in addition to marketing and promotion to hire and train sales agents conduct all advertising provide credit rebuilding services computer programming and purchasing design all brochures manuals phone scripts question and answers and videos the agreement was exclusive it provided for a payment of dollar_figure for each video tape sold per month for each active customer and dollar_figure the service issued a proposed denial that taxpayer was neither organized nor operated exclusively for exempt purposes because e e e the purpose expressed in its articles was too broad and did not describe an exempt_purpose it was operated as a trade_or_business ordinarily carried on for profit to the general_public without regard to financial status and t failed to demonstrate that no part of its net_earnings would inure to the benefit of private individuals due to the close connection with a for-profit owned by the president in response taxpayer informed the service of certain changes stating with respect to the marketing agreement the relationship described in the initial form_1023 under which a for profit corporation owned by the president does marketing for taxpayer would not be utilized instead taxpayer would be responsible for its own marketing taxpayer submitted revised articles of incorporation restating its purposes as follows e e e to help reduce personal bankruptcy by informing the general_public on personal money management and consumer credit counseling to aid low income or unemployed individuals and families with fiscal problems to assist low income or unemployed individuals with debt consolidation and participate in corporate fair share programs based upon these representations the service issued a favorable determination_letter the approval letter included a paragraph describing the changes and additional representations you have amended the purpose clause added a dissolution clause and made other changes in your articles of incorporation you represent that your services will be provided to those who are considered in need of charity such as low income individuals you also represent that you will be responsible for the marketing of your services based on the additional information supplied to us and assuming your operations will be as stated in your application we have determined you are exempt examination the facts developed during the examination of fy20' recognized as exempt taxpayer contracted with the same related for-profit entity for the same services described above plus additional services constituting nearly all of its operations the examination also concluded that taxpayer primarily marketed and enrolled individuals in debt management plans dmps’ it did not primarily counsel individuals or families about personal finance budgeting or credit the telephone calls only screened potential customers for the ability to make payments that met creditors’ requirements for a dmp taxpayer did not report these changes in operations to the service showed that six years after it was taxpayer appealed the proposed revocation appeals sustained the revocation following the appeals process the national_office received this request for relief from retroactive revocation as a mandatory tam law sec_7805 of the code provides that the secretary may prescribe the extent if any to which any ruling including any judicial decision or any administrative determination other than by regulation relating to the internal revenue laws shall be applied without retroactive effect sec_1_501_a_-1 of the income_tax regulations regulations states that an organization that has been determined by the commissioner to be exempt under sec_501 may rely upon such determination so long as there are no substantial changes in the organization’s character purposes or methods of operation and subject_to the commissioner’s inherent power_to_revoke rulings because of a change in the law or regulations or for other good cause sec_301 b -1 of the procedure and administration regulations provides that the commissioner may prescribe the extent to which any ruling issued by his authorization shall be applied without retroactive effect revproc_2011_5 r b in section dollar_figure states that all requests for relief under sec_7805 of the code must be made through a request for technical_advice tam section dollar_figure states further that when during the course of an examination by eo examinations or consideration by the appeals area director a taxpayer is informed of a proposed revocation a request to limit the retroactive application of the revocation must itself be made in the form of a request for a tam and should discuss the items listed in section dollar_figure as they relate to the taxpayer’s situation section dollar_figure of revproc_2011_5 provides in part that generally a tam that revokes a determination_letter is not applied retroactively if there has been no misstatement or omission of material facts the facts at the time of the transaction are not materially different from the facts on which the determination_letter was based there has been no change in the applicable law and the taxpayer directly involved in the determination_letter acted in good_faith in relying on the determination_letter and the retroactive revocation would be to the taxpayer's detriment revproc_2011_9 r b sets forth procedures for issuing determination letters from eo determinations and rulings on applications for recognition of exempt status by eo technical on the exempt status of organizations under sec_501 these procedures also apply to revocation or modification of determination letters or rulings set forth in revproc_2011_4 which further refers to revproc_2011_5 sections and section dollar_figure of revproc_2011_9 states in part that the revocation or modification of a determination_letter or ruling recognizing exemption may be retroactive if the organization omitted or misstated a material fact or operated in a manner materially different from that originally represented in certain cases an organization may seek relief from retroactive revocation or modification of a determination or ruling under sec_7805 of the code using the procedures sec_12 of revproc_2011_9 states that where there is a material_change inconsistent with exemption in the character the purpose or the method of operation of an organization revocation or modification will ordinarily take effect as of the date of such material_change in 353_us_180 the supreme court held that the commissioner has broad discretion to revoke a ruling retroactively it further held that a retroactive ruling may not be disturbed unless the commissioner abused the discretion vested in him u s pincite in 324_f2d_633 the court found far from convincing the foundation's efforts to demonstrate that its information reports were adequate and sufficient to apprise the commissioner of its entry into the business activities which led to denial of its tax exempt status f 2d pincite shortly after receiving its tax-exempt ruling the foundation contracted with a for-profit company but failed to disclose this fact to the commissioner on its forms the court upheld the service’s retroactive revocation in variety club tent no charities inc v commissioner t c memo the court held that petitioner operated in a manner materially different from that originally represented the organization represented in its exemption application and articles of incorporation that no part of its net_income would inure to the benefit of any private_shareholder_or_individual but the court found instances of inurement over several years and upheld the service’s retroactive revocation for such years analysis during the year under exam taxpayer’s operations were materially different from the description it provided in its exemption application see variety club tent no charities t c memo revproc_2011_9 sec_12 taxpayer primarily marketed and enrolled individuals in dmps screening potential clients based on the creditors’ requirements it did not ascertain or provide education and services tailored to the financial needs and circumstances of the general_public after receiving its determination_letter it once again contracted with the for-profit company wholly- owned by its president to conduct most of its operations contrary to what it represented in the application process finally taxpayer did not fully apprise the service of these material changes see stevens bros foundation f 2d pincite failure to adequately and sufficiently inform the service of material changes in operations therefore revocation may be retroactive to the year under examination when the service determined taxpayer had made material changes in operations see automobile club of michigan u s pincite commissioner has broad discretion to revoke a ruling retroactively revproc_2011_9 sec_12 revocation ordinarily applies as of the date of material changes in operations first day of tax_year the commissioner tege has declined to exercise discretion tc limit the retroactive effect of revocation of taxpayer’s exempt status under sec_501 revocation is effective as of the conclusion its


internal_revenue_service index no number release date cc ebeo 4-plr-122062-98 date company this is in reply to a request for a ruling concerning the deduction limitation of sec_162 of the internal_revenue_code the facts as presented by company are as follows company is a publicly_held_corporation and a calendar_year taxpayer several of company’s corporate officers have either resigned or intend to resign their positions as employees and corporate officers and all of their duties as such these individuals may continue to perform services as company independent consultants and directors for the remainder of their resignation year and in subsequent years company contends that resignation from their positions as employees and corporate officers does not necessarily equate to separation_from_service with company these persons may be listed pursuant to the executive compensation disclosure rules under the securities exchange act as members of the group of highest-compensated executive officers of company for both the resignation year and for subsequent years based on their deferred bonuses and annual income from consulting contracts some corporate officers who have been listed among the top four officers other than the ceo may at some point in the future resign their positions as company officers although they would continue to receive compensation from option income and possibly from consulting income in subsequent years it is not contemplated that they would reassume their positions as corporate officers of company subsequent to such resignations sec_162 of the code allows as a deduction all the ordinary and necessary expenses paid_or_incurred during the taxable_year in carrying on any trade or plr-122062-98 business including a reasonable allowance for salaries or other compensation_for_personal_services actually rendered sec_162 of the code provides that in the case of any publicly_held_corporation no deduction is allowed for applicable_employee_remuneration with respect to any covered_employee to the extent that the amount of the remuneration for the taxable_year exceeds dollar_figure sec_162 of the code defines covered_employee to mean any employee of the taxpayer if as of the close of the taxable_year such employee is the chief_executive_officer of the taxpayer or is an individual acting in such capacity or the total compensation of such employee for the taxable_year is required to be reported to shareholders under the securities exchange act of by reason of such employee being among the highest compensated officers for the taxable_year other than the chief_executive_officer sec_1_162-27 of the income_tax regulations provides the general_rule for who is a covered_employee under the regulations a covered_employee means any individual who on the last day of the taxable_year is a the chief_executive_officer of the corporation or is acting in such capacity or b among the four highest compensated officers other than the chief_executive_officer whether an individual is the chief_executive_officer or one of the four highest compensated officers is determined pursuant to the executive compensation disclosure rules under the exchange act in the notice of proposed rulemaking containing the proposed_regulations under sec_162 the preamble contains the following language concerning the identification of covered_employee the regulations clarify which employees are covered employees for purposes of sec_162 the legislative_history to sec_162 provides that covered employees are defined by reference to the sec rules governing executive compensation disclosure under the exchange act under the regulations an individual generally is a covered_employee if the individual’s compensation is reported on the summary compensation table under the sec’s executive compensation disclosure rules as set forth in item of regulation s-k cfr under the exchange act however the regulations specifically provide that in order to be a covered_employee for sec_162 purposes an individual must be employed as an executive officer on the last day of the taxable_year thus only those employees who appear on the summary compensation table and who are also employed on the last day of the taxable_year are covered employees plr-122062-98 although the clarification of covered employees for purposes of sec_162 is defined by reference to sec rules the sec disclosure rules call for additional individuals for whom disclosure would have been required but for the fact that they were not serving as executive officers at the end of the last completed fiscal_year thus individuals may be listed as members of the highest compensated group who are not covered employees for purposes of sec_162 of the code therefore based on the facts as outlined above we rule that for purposes of sec_162 of the code company officers will not be covered employees with respect to any year in which they have resigned their positions as company officers and company employees before the last day of that year or with respect to any subsequent year to such resignation with no intent to resume their duties as officers at anytime in the foreseeable future accordingly no compensation paid to these officers with respect to their resignation year or with respect to any subsequent year in which they do not serve as employee-officers of the company will be subject_to the sec_162 deduction limitation this ruling is directed only to the taxpayer who requested it sec_6110 of the code provides that it may not be used or cited as precedent except as specifically ruled above no opinion is expressed as to the federal tax consequences of the transaction described above under any other provisions of the code no opinion is expressed as to the status of the consultants and or directors as officers or employees of company sincerely yours _________________________ robert b misner assistant chief branch office of the associate chief_counsel employee_benefits and exempt_organizations enclosure copy for sec_6110 purposes


t c summary opinion united_states tax_court michael j goldberg petitioner v commissioner of internal revenue respondent docket no 29986-07s filed date michael j goldberg pro_se terry serena for respondent summary opinion thornton chief_judge this case was heard pursuant to the provisions of sec_7463 of the internal_revenue_code in effect at the time the petition was filed pursuant to sec_7463 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 unless otherwise noted all section references are to the internal_revenue_code as amended and in effect at all relevant times pursuant to sec_6330 petitioner appeals respondent’s determination to proceed by levy to collect his unpaid federal_income_tax for tax_year background petitioner resided in ohio when he filed his petition on date petitioner filed his individual federal_income_tax return for tax_year claiming a filing_status of single and reporting a tax_liability of dollar_figure a withholding credit of dollar_figure and a balance due of dollar_figure petitioner did not remit the balance due when he filed the return also on date petitioner and his spouse filed a joint federal_income_tax return for tax_year the joint_return showed and respondent does not dispute that petitioner overpaid hi sec_2001 tax_liability by dollar_figure on date respondent sent petitioner a letter final notice_of_intent_to_levy and notice of your right to a hearing for the unpaid individual federal_income_tax liability for tax_year plus accrued interest and an addition_to_tax for late payment in response petitioner timely filed a form request for a collection_due_process or equivalent_hearing on the form petitioner 1on or about date petitioner paid the principal_amount of dollar_figure did not request a collection alternative but stated as the reason for disagreeing with the filing of the levy i do not owe the amount stated on date petitioner and respondent’s appeals settlement officer held a collection_due_process_hearing by telephone during the hearing petitioner’s sole contention was that he had overpaid his income taxes for tax_year sec_2001 and sec_2002 and that these overpayments should be applied to his liability for tax_year the settlement officer informed petitioner that the only overpayment that was indicated on respondent’s records was the overpayment of dollar_figure petitioner did not propose a collection alternative and did not complete a form a collection information statement for wage earners and self-employed individuals as the settlement officer had requested on date respondent issued petitioner a notice_of_determination concerning collection action s under sec_6320 and or sustaining the proposed levy the notice found that all requirements of applicable law and administrative procedure had been met and stated that petitioner had not proposed a collection alternative or provided the requested information because petitioner had filed his return for tax_year on date the notice determined that the period of limitations under sec_6511 to claim a refund_or_credit for had expired and thus the overpayment was unavailable to offset his income_tax_liability for tax_year petitioner timely petitioned this court for review of respondent’s determination the petition reiterates petitioner’s contention that he owes no federal_income_tax for because he has sufficient tax_credits to offset any amount owed a trial was held on date in cincinnati ohio at the conclusion of the trial the court ordered the record held open until date later extended on respondent’s motion to date so that the parties might submit additional evidence regarding petitioner’s claim that he has an overpayment credit from his tax_year that should be applied to his tax_liability the parties submitted no additional evidence discussion sec_6330 provides for notice and opportunity of a hearing before the internal_revenue_service irs may levy upon the property of any person sec_6330 allows challenges to the existence or amount of the underlying tax_liability only if the person did not receive a notice_of_deficiency or 2on brief respondent asserts and petitioner has not disputed that petitioner did not respond to respondent’s proposed posttrial supplemental stipulation and did not propose one of his own have an opportunity to dispute the liability respondent does not contest that petitioner is entitled to challenge his underlying liability in this collection proceeding we review petitioner’s underlying liability de novo and other issues for abuse_of_discretion see 117_tc_183 116_tc_60 whether a credit or overpayment that the taxpayer is entitled to from another tax period can be applied to satisfy the tax_liability in question is a challenge to the underlying liability 114_tc_604 114_tc_176 petitioner asserts primarily that he has sufficient credits from overpayments from tax_year sec_2001 and sec_2002 to satisfy his outstanding liability for tax_year in evaluating the commissioner’s determinations under sec_6330 we may properly consider the taxpayer’s tax_liabilities for years that were not subject_to the notice_of_determination insofar as they are relevant to computing the taxpayer’ sec_3because petitioner paid the dollar_figure principal_amount of his tax on or about date the outstanding liability that remains in dispute is for accrued interest and late payment additions to tax apart from his contention that he should have overpayment credits available to satisfy these liabilities petitioner has not raised any interest abatement claim under sec_6404 and has not challenged respondent’s imposition of the late payment addition_to_tax tax_liability for years that are the subject of the notice_of_determination 125_tc_14 we do not have jurisdiction however in this collection proceeding to order a refund_or_credit of taxes paid see 126_tc_1 respondent does not dispute that petitioner has an overpayment credit for but contends that it is not allowable under sec_6511 because he waited too long to claim it for the reasons explained below we agree the joint_return that petitioner and his wife filed on date constituted their claim for credit or refund for the amount of tax overpayment allowable to them as a credit or refund cannot exceed the portion of the tax which they paid for tax_year within the three years preceding date the date their claim for credit or refund was filed ie tax_payments made after date and before date see sec_6511 perkins v commissioner tcmemo_2008_103 respondent asserts and petitioner does not dispute that petitioner and his spouse’ sec_2001 tax was paid through wage withholdings under sec_6513 a taxpayer’s wage withholdings are deemed to have been paid on the 15th day of the fourth month following the close of his taxable_year with respect to which such tax is allowable as a credit under sec_31 ie on date therefore none of petitioner and his wife’ sec_2001 tax overpayment is allowable as a credit or refund because the tax was deemed paid more than three years before the claim for credit or refund was filed see perkins v commissioner tcmemo_2008_103 petitioner also asserts that he has an overpayment available from tax_year that should be applied against his liability but petitioner has stipulated that respondent’s records do not reveal the existence of a credit balance for any_tax year other than and despite the court’s holding the record open for this purpose petitioner has submitted no evidence that he has any available credit for consequently unlike the overpayment credit the alleged credit represents a mere claim of an overpayment this court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate such an overpayment claim and it need not be resolved before the irs can proceed with collection of the liability at issue see weber v commissioner t c __ __ slip op pincite date greene-thapedi v commissioner t c pincite 4in his petition petitioner asserts that if there is a statute_of_limitations on credits then there is an equal statute_of_limitations on irs collecting petitioner is mistaken under sec_6502 the irs generally has years after making a timely assessment to collect the assessed tax by making a levy or commencing a court_proceeding this 10-year collection_period is suspended during the pendency of a sec_6330 hearing and any appeals therefrom sec_6330 see also sec_6502 and sec_6503 in sum petitioner has failed to show that he has available any allowable overpayment credit from or to apply against the balance that remains outstanding for his tax_liability he has proposed no other collection alternative the settlement officer did not abuse her discretion by not considering collection alternatives that petitioner never made see vines v commissioner tcmemo_2009_267 aff’d 418_fedappx_900 11th cir from our review of the record we are satisfied that respondent has met the requirements of sec_6330 consequently we shall sustain respondent’s determination to proceed with the proposed levy to collect amounts that remain outstanding with respect to petitioner’s tax_liability to reflect the foregoing decision will be entered for respondent