Ezel / IRS Rulings / 200919038

CCA 200919038: Third-party return information required a direct link to the issue

Number
200919038
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Disclosure in Judicial or Administrative Tax Administration Proceedings
Topics
Procedure, penalties, and administration
Code sections
§ 6103
Ruling dated
March 25, 2009
Publicly released
May 8, 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 advised that disclosure could proceed if the item or transaction test in section 6103(h)(4)(B) or (C) was met. The message identified a definite employer-employee relationship but deferred to the recipient's knowledge of the remaining facts. It emphasized that third-party return information must be directly related to resolving an issue in the case. Mere relevance was not enough.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: When could third-party return information be disclosed in the tax-administration proceeding?
  • Outcome: Advice given: the statutory item or transaction test had to be met, and the information had to relate directly to resolving an issue.
  • Key authorities: IRC § 6103(h)(4)(B), (C).

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA-325151-09 Number: 200919038
Release Date: 5/8/2009
Office: --------------
UILC: 6103.08-04

From: ------------
Sent: 03/25/2009
To: ---------------
Cc: ----------------
Subject: Advice regarding 6103 issues

I agree, if it meets the item or transaction test of 6103(h)(4)(B) or (C) you should be fine. There's definitely an employer-employee relationship. Otherwise, you're in a better position to know the salient facts.
Remember that the third party information being disclosed has to be directly related to the resolution of an issue in the case. The standard is not relevance.

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