Ezel / IRS Rulings / 200913039

CCA 200913039: A partner's limitations consent had to mention partnership items

Number
200913039
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Period of Limitations for Making Assessments
Topics
Procedure, penalties, and administration
Code sections
§ 6229, § 6501
Ruling dated
September 23, 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 reviewed a final analysis of TEFRA issues and added a point about applying section 6501 to a partner. When a partner's assessment period remains open by consent, the consent must specifically refer to partnership items. The advice cites section 6229(b)(3) and Ginsburg v. Commissioner for that requirement. It also explains that the issue likely would not arise in the matters under review because the taxpayers typically had not filed returns, claiming Virgin Islands residency as the reason.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: What must a consent say to extend a partner's assessment period for partnership items?
  • Outcome: Advice given: the consent must specifically refer to partnership items.
  • Key authorities: IRC §§ 6229(b)(3), 6501; Ginsburg v. Commissioner.

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA-923115-08 Number: 200913039
Release Date: 3/27/2009
Office: --------------
UILC: 6229.00-00

From: -------------------
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 11:56 AM
To: -------------------------
Cc:
Subject: RE: tefra issues.doc

I read your final version and it looks good.

Just an added thought on the application of section 6501 to a partner. If the partner's statute is open by
consent, the consent must specifically include a reference to partnership items. I.R.C. 6229(b)(3);
Ginsburg v. Commisisoner. In these cases the statute is typically open because the taxpayer is a non-
filer (claiming VI residency as an excuse), so this should not be an issue.

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