Ezel / IRS Rulings / 200917032

CCA 200917032: Prior deductions could not be added again to a theft-loss deduction

Number
200917032
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Deductions For Losses
Topics
Income and deductions
Code sections
§ 165
Ruling dated
March 24, 2009
Publicly released
April 24, 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

The IRS answered a follow-up question about a theft-loss revenue procedure. The advice said the procedure barred taxpayers from adding previously deducted amounts to their theft-loss deduction. The writer saw no problem if taxpayers met some definitions under the procedure but had a zero deduction. The short email did not provide further facts or identify the revenue procedure by number.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Could taxpayers who met some definitions under the procedure have a theft-loss deduction of zero?
  • Outcome: Advice given: yes, because previously deducted amounts could not be deducted again.
  • Key authorities: IRC § 165; an unidentified revenue procedure.

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2009032419391550 Number: 200917032
Release Date: 4/24/2009
Office: ----------
UILC: 165.00-00

From: --------------------
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 7:39:18 PM
To: ------------------
Cc: ----------------------
Subject: RE: Theft loss follow-up

---------

The Revenue Procedure prohibits taxpayers from adding previously deducted amounts to their theft
loss deduction. So I don't think there's a problem if they meet some of the definitions, but have a
deduction of zero.

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

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