CCA 200914049: The corporation's authorized officer had to sign its Form 872 consent

Plain-English summary

Chief Counsel advised how to identify a corporation and obtain a valid signature on a Form 872 limitations-period consent. A "care of" notation on the return could be left off if it was not part of the corporation's legal name. If that wording was or had been part of the legal name, the consent should use the corporation's name followed by its former name. Because the corporation had not filed a consolidated return for the relevant period, its parent's successors should not sign. The consent instead required the signature of a listed corporate officer or another officer authorized to act for the corporation.

Ruling snapshot

• Question: Which corporate name and signer should appear on the corporation's Form 872 consent?
• Outcome: Advice given: use the corporation's legal name, account for a former legal name if necessary, and obtain an authorized officer's signature rather than a signature from the parent's successors.
• Key authorities: IRC § 6501.

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA-312112-09 Number: 200914049
Release Date: 4/3/2009
Office: --------------
UILC: 6501.08-09

From: --------------------
Sent: March 12, 2009
To: ------------------------
Cc: ----------------------------
Subject: RE: ----- 872 question

Thanks. I thought perhaps the entity name would be listed on the signature line as well. It sounds as though the c/o portion of the name on the return is extraneous and is not part of the corporation's legal name. If this is the case, then it can be left off of the consent. If it is (or was) part of the legal name of the corporation, then use the name of the corporation on the consent, followed by ", formerly [old name]."

As ------- did not file a consolidated return for -------, its parent's successors should not sign the consent. A president, vice president, treasurer, assistant treasurer, chief accounting officer or any other officer duly authorized to act for ------- should sign.