Ezel / IRS Rulings / 200913021

CCA 200913021: Voluntary information sharing did not require an IRS summons

Number
200913021
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Examination of Books and Witnesses
Topics
Procedure, penalties, and administration
Code sections
§ 7602
Ruling dated
July 8, 2008
Publicly released
March 27, 2009
Source
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page covers legal advice the IRS Office of Chief Counsel wrote for IRS staff, issued in 2009, which can't be cited as precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current Code and IRS guidance say, with citations.

Currency note: this determination was released in 2009
Statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later IRS guidance may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or position mentioned here.
Not precedent. Under 26 U.S.C. § 6110(k)(3), this written determination may not be used or cited as precedent. It is advice from the IRS Office of Chief Counsel to IRS personnel on the facts they presented, and identifying details were redacted by the IRS before release. The official IRS release (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source.
About this page: The plain-English summary and ruling snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official IRS release. The full text is the IRS's own document.
View official IRS release (PDF)

Plain-English summary

Chief Counsel addressed how the IRS could obtain information from the Department of Labor. The writer distinguished the Neece decision because it involved a financial institution covered by the Right to Financial Privacy Act. Even a bank could voluntarily provide information without an IRS summons. The advice agreed that a federal-state information-sharing agreement would be sufficient for the contemplated disclosure.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Did the IRS need a summons to obtain information voluntarily provided under an intergovernmental agreement?
  • Outcome: Advice given: no summons was needed for voluntary disclosure, and a federal-state agreement was sufficient.
  • Key authorities: IRC § 7602; Right to Financial Privacy Act; Neece decision.

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA-788320-08 Number: 200913021
Release Date: 3/27/2009
Office: ----------
UILC: 7602.00-00

From: --------------------
Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2008 8:32 AM
To: ------------------------
Cc: ----------------------------
Subject: [RE: Information for securing info from Dept. of Labor]

Darn I thought I already sent this to you. Just found it in my drafts.

HI ------I think this might have something to do with the Neece decision. But that decision involved a "financial institution" as defined by the Right to Financial Privacy Act. Even with a bank if the bank voluntarily turns over information IRS doesn't need a summons. I agree that if there is a Fed/State agreement that's all they need. Hope that helps.

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

What does the Code say today, for your facts?

This advice was written for IRS staff and cannot be cited. Ezel checks the current Internal Revenue Code and IRS guidance against your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace