Ezel / IRS Rulings / 200945059

A one-party agreement may not support a TEFRA refund

Number
200945059
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Other Requests
Topics
Procedure, penalties, and administration
Code sections
§ 6227
Ruling dated
September 18, 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 advised that there was no agreement to refund an overassessment if the IRS did not cosign the agreement. An agreement signed by only one party would also likely not be a valid administrative adjustment request under the cited precedent, Samuelli v. Commissioner. Counsel stated that the informal claim doctrine available for non-TEFRA refunds does not apply, so the taxpayer might not be entitled to a refund and the mitigation issue appeared moot.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Can a taxpayer obtain a TEFRA refund based on an agreement signed by only one party?
  • Outcome: Advice given
  • Key authorities: IRC § 6227; Samuelli v. Commissioner

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2009091815414337 Number: 200945059
Release Date: 11/6/2009
Office: ----------
UILC: 6227.05-00

From: -------------------
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 3:41:49 PM
To: --------------------
Cc: -----------
Subject: RE: Barred Overassessment?

There is no agreement for a refund if we did not cosign the agreement. The agreement signed by only one party would also not likely constitute a valid AAR under Samuelli v. Commissioner. Under that precedent there is no informal claim doctrine as there is for non-TEFRA refunds. So taxpayer may not be entitled a refund. As a consequence, the mitigation issue appears moot.

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

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