Ezel / IRS Rulings / 201018008

CCA 201018008: Counsel advised protecting both TEFRA and non-TEFRA statutes

Number
201018008
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Exception for Small Partnerships
Topics
Procedure, penalties, and administration
Code sections
§ 6231, § 9100
Publicly released
May 7, 2010
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 2010, 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 2010
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

An IRS Chief Counsel email addressed a question about a purported TEFRA election for a partnership. Counsel advised protecting both TEFRA and non-TEFRA statutes because not all partners had signed the election. The message also noted that a retroactive-election ruling might be available under IRC § 9100, while stating that the sender was not an expert on whether that option applied. The advice identifies both the statute-protection issue and a possible route for seeking retroactive relief.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: How should the TEFRA and non-TEFRA statutes be protected when not all partners signed a purported TEFRA election?
  • Outcome: Advice given
  • Key authorities: IRC §§ 6231 and 9100

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2010041216230637 Number: 201018008
Release Date: 5/7/2010
Office: ----------
UILC: 6231.01-01

From: -------------------
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 4:23:09 PM
To: --------------
Cc: -----------
Subject: RE: TEFRA election

We should protect both the TEFRA and non-TEFRA statutes. Our primary position would be that TEFRA
does not apply since not all partners signed the purported election.

Arguably, they could request a ruling allowing retroactive election under section 9100. I am not an expert
on that provision, so its unclear whether that is an option.

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