CCA 200519058: Counsel cannot confirm revised railroad employer date

Plain-English summary

After reexamining a redacted business, the Railroad Retirement Board said it became an employer under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act on an earlier date than previously stated. Chief Counsel did not specifically object, but said it could not verify the status of all affected entities and therefore could not say whether it concurred. Counsel expected the earlier date to have little impact under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act and asked to be told if a more conclusive answer was needed. Both dates and the business details are redacted.

Ruling snapshot

• Question: Could Chief Counsel confirm the board's revised effective date for railroad employer status?
• Outcome: Advice: no specific objection, but no conclusive concurrence because the affected entities could not all be verified.
• Key authorities: Railroad Retirement Tax Act; IRC § 3231.

Full text (IRS public release)

Office of Chief Counsel

Memorandum
Internal Revenue Service

Number: 200519058
Release Date: 5/13/2005

CC:TEGE:EOEG:ET1
POSTN-163335-04

UILC: 3231.01-00

date: February 8, 2005
to: Director, Submission Processing
Cincinnati, OH
Attn: Entity Unit

from: Office of Division Counsel/Associate Chief Counsel (Tax Exempt & Government Entities)

subject: Railroad Retirement Tax Act Status

In accordance with the coordination procedure established between the Service and the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB), the RRB has provided us with its opinion, upon reexamination, that the following business became an employer under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act effective -----------------, rather than ------------------:

-------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------

We have reviewed the opinion of the RRB and, while we do not specifically object to its conclusion, we cannot verify the status of all the affected entities to determine whether we concur. Furthermore, we expect that an earlier effective date of ------------------would have little impact under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act. Please let us know if a more conclusive answer is needed.

Janine Cook