CCA 200946039: Mitigation of a double deduction
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.
Plain-English summary
This Chief Counsel advice discusses whether the mitigation provisions could correct an apparent double allowance of a deduction. It explains that a final disposition of a refund claim may be a determination under § 1313(a)(3), and that allowing a refund could produce the same deduction in both earlier and later years. The writer identifies an inconsistent position under § 1311(b)(1)(B) and a possible adjustment under § 1312(2), assuming the relevant assessments were collected and a refund claim was filed. The email does not reach a final determination.
Ruling snapshot
- Question: Can the mitigation provisions correct a deduction allowed both in earlier and later tax years?
- Outcome: Advice given
- Key authorities: IRC §§ 1311, 1312, and 1313
Full text (IRS public release)
ID: CCA_2009092915504554 Number: 200946039
Release Date: 11/13/2009
Office: --------------
UILC: 1311.00-00
From: ----------------------
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 3:50:46 PM
To: --------------------
Cc: --------------------
Subject: FW: Barred Overassessment?
---------
---- forwarded me your question below. "Determination" is defined for mitigation purposes under sec. 1313(a)(3) as a final disposition by the Secretary of a claim for refund. In this situation, it appears as though the determination would allow a deduction for years 1, 2, and 3, and this deduction was also erroneously allowed to the taxpayer for years 4 and 5. This double allowance of a deduction is a circumstance of adjustment pursuant to section 1312(2). If the Secretary allows the taxpayer's claim for refund, the taxpayer would be claiming a deduction for these items both in years 1, 2, and 3 and years 4 and 5. Pursuant to section 1311(b)(1)(B), the Service would be adopting a position maintained by the taxpayer that is inconsistent with the erroneous allowance of the deduction in years 4 and 5. Therefore, there is an argument that mitigation would apply to correct the double allowance and assess for years 4 and 5, assuming that we actually collected the assessments and the taxpayers file a refund claim.
Please let me know if you have any further questions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------
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