Ezel / IRS Rulings / 200923043

CCA 200923043: Settlement with actual partner can convert joint-return spouse's items

Number
200923043
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Partner
Topics
Procedure, penalties, and administration
Code sections
§ 6231
Ruling dated
May 1, 2009
Publicly released
June 5, 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 the treatment of a partnership settlement depended on a spouse's status. If the spouse was treated as a partner only because the spouses filed a joint return, the IRS could accept a settlement from the actual partner alone when it would seek collection only from him. When his partnership items converted, the jointly filing spouse's items would also convert, leaving no non-agreeing partner in the proceeding. The advice points to a separate regulation when the spouse instead holds a community property interest in the partnership.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Could a partnership case be treated as fully agreed when only the actual partner accepted the settlement?
  • Outcome: Advice given, depending on whether the spouse held a community property interest or was treated as a partner only through a joint return
  • Key authorities: Treas. Reg. §§ 301.6231(a)(2)-1(a)(4)(ii) and 301.6231(a)(12)-1; Calloway v. Commissioner (2nd Circuit)

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2009050108443837 Number: 200923043
Release Date: 6/5/2009
Office: --------------
UILC: 6231.02-00

From: -------------------
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 8:44:42 AM
To: --------------------------
Cc: -----------
Subject: RE: TEFRA settlement question - informational only

No. But it depends on the spouse's status. Does she hold a community property interest in the partnership? Or is she treated as a partner only by virtue of filing a joint return? In the later case we can accept a settlement from only the actual partner if we will only be looking to him for collection. Once his items convert, the items also convert for his jointly filing spouse as well under Calloway v. Commissioner (2nd Circuit) as adopted by Treas. Reg. 301.6231(a)(2)-1(a)(4)(ii). Thus, the case could be treated as fully agreed since the only non-agreeing partner drops out of the proceeding anyway. For community property interests see Treas. Reg. 301.6231(a)(12)-1.

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