Ezel / IRS Rulings / 200945047

Ignorance of DOMA alone may not show reasonable belief that benefits were excludable

Number
200945047
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Reasonable Belief that Amount is Excludable
Topics
Employment taxes
Code sections
§ 3121
Ruling dated
September 8, 2009
Publicly released
November 6, 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

Counsel stated that the Defense of Marriage Act's definition of spouse was specific and unequivocal. In considering whether benefits for a same-sex domestic partner were excludable from wages, counsel asked what information supported the taxpayer's claimed reasonable belief, such as a legal opinion or other authority. Counsel suggested that failing to investigate the law could be willful blindness and that simply not knowing about DOMA would not, by itself, demonstrate reasonable belief.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Can a taxpayer's lack of knowledge of DOMA alone establish reasonable belief that domestic-partner benefits were excludable from wages?
  • Outcome: Advice given
  • Key authorities: IRC § 3121; Defense of Marriage Act

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2009090810495932 Number: 200945047
Release Date: 11/6/2009
Office: -----------------------------
UILC: 3121.01-23

From: --------------------
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 10:50:04 AM
To: ---------------------
Cc: --------------------
Subject: RE: Employee Discounts for Same Sex Domestic Partner

-----

The DOMA has been in effect for many years (since 1996, I think), and it is pretty unequivocal with respect to its definition of a spouse. The law is very specific. Has the taxpayer asserted that it had a reasonable belief that the benefits were excludable from wages? If so, what sort of information is the taxpayer pointing to to support its assertion that it had a reasonable belief that the benefits were excludable from wages? For example, was it relying upon a legal opinion or other authority? I think we would say that a failure to investigate the law is a form of "willful blindness" and this would not be sufficient to demonstrate a reasonable belief that the benefits were excludable from wages. I think that the claim that "I didn't know about the DOMA" would not, in and of itself demonstrate a reasonable belief. Hope this is helpful.

--------

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