PLR 200935012: Additional time granted to file an election after a missed deadline

Number
200935012
Outcome
Approved
Document type
Private Letter Ruling
IRS subject
Allowable Worthless Stock Loss; Regulation Section 1.337(d); Loss on Stock of Subsidiary
Code sections
§ 337, § 6110
Ruling dated
June 1, 2009
Publicly released
August 28, 2009

Apply this to your situation

This page covers one taxpayer's ruling, 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 resolved one taxpayer's situation on its specific facts, 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

A parent company asked the IRS to modify an earlier ruling that gave it more time to file an election concerning a loss on subsidiary stock. The company missed a condition requiring the election to be filed within 60 days because it reasonably relied on a qualified tax professional. The IRS found that the company acted reasonably and in good faith, and that additional time would not prejudice the government. The condition will be treated as satisfied if the election is filed within 60 days after this ruling.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Can the parent company receive additional time to satisfy the filing condition in the prior ruling?
  • Outcome: Approved
  • Key authorities: IRC § 1.337(d)-2T(c)(3); Treas. Reg. §§ 301.9100-1 through 301.9100-3; IRC § 6110(k)(3)

Full text (IRS public release)

Internal Revenue Service
Department of the Treasury
Washington, DC 20224

Number: 200935012
Third Party Communication: None
Release Date: 8/28/2009
Date of Communication: Not Applicable
Person To Contact:
Index Number: 337.16-02, 9100.29-00
--------------------------, ID No. -------------
Telephone Number:
---------------------
----------------------
Refer Reply To:
--------------------------------------------------------------- CC:CORP:01
-------------------------------
PLR-118546-09
----------------------------
Date:
----------------------------------
June 1, 2009
-------------------------

Legend

Parent = ----------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Tax Professional = -----------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Company Official = ---------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear ------------------:

This is in response to your letter dated April 3, 2009, requesting a modification to a ruling letter dated October 16, 2008, our control number PLR-133290-08, PLR 200905021, issued to Parent (the “Prior Letter Ruling”).
The legend, facts, representations, and caveats appearing in the Prior Letter Ruling are hereby incorporated by reference for purposes of this letter. The Prior Letter Ruling granted an extension of time under §§ 301.9100-1 through 301.9100-3 of the Procedure and Administration Regulations for Parent to file a “§ 1.337(d)-2T(c) statement” under § 1.337(d)-2T(c)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations (the “Election”) to recognize some or all of a loss upon the disposition of stock of a subsidiary. Additional information was submitted in a letter dated May 26, 2009.

PLR-118546-09
2

The granting of an extension in the Prior Letter Ruling was conditioned, in part, on the filing of the Election, within 60 days from the date on the Prior Letter Ruling (“the Condition”). However, for various reasons, Parent failed to satisfy the Condition. Information and affidavits submitted by Additional Tax Professional and Additional Company Official explain the circumstances that resulted in the failure of Parent to satisfy the Condition. The information establishes that Parent reasonably relied on a qualified tax professional who failed to satisfy, or advise Parent to satisfy, the Condition. See § 301.9100-3(b)(i)(v).

Based on the facts and information submitted, including the affidavits submitted and representations that have been made, we conclude that Parent has shown that it acted reasonably and in good faith in failing to satisfy the Condition, that the requirements of
§§ 301.9100-1 and 301.9100-3 are satisfied, and that granting additional time to satisfy the Condition will not prejudice the interests of the government. Accordingly, the Condition will be deemed satisfied if the Election is filed within 60 days of the date on this letter.

This ruling is directed only to the taxpayer requesting it. Section 6110(k)(3) of the Code provides that it may not be used or cited as precedent.

A copy of this letter and the Prior Letter Ruling must be attached to any income tax return to which it is relevant. Alternatively, taxpayers filing their returns electronically may satisfy this requirement by attaching a statement to their return that provides the date and control number of this letter and the Prior Letter Ruling.

Pursuant to a power of attorney on file with this office, a copy of this letter is being sent to your authorized representative.

Sincerely,

Ken Cohen
Senior Technician Reviewer, Branch 3
Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Corporate)

cc:

What does the Code say today, for your facts?

This determination bound one taxpayer 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