Ezel / IRS Rulings / 1021024
Chief Counsel Advice 1021024 Released May 28, 2010 Advice

Counsel says an officer may be entitled to a collection due process notice

Apply this to your situation

This page covers one taxpayer's ruling from 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 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

This Chief Counsel Advice considers collection against an officer's personal assets for a partnership debt. It states that the situation is similar to one in which a partner is separately liable for partnership debt under state law. Because the collection effort targets the officer's personal assets rather than only certain transferred assets, the advice says the officer should be treated as a taxpayer entitled to a collection due process notice under IRC § 6330.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Is an officer whose personal assets are targeted for collection entitled to a collection due process notice?
  • Outcome: Advice given
  • Key authorities: IRC § 6330

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2010042709532855 Number: 201021024
Release Date: 5/28/2010
Office: ----------------------------
UILC: 6330.00-00

From: ---------------------
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 9:53:31 AM
To: -------------------
Cc:
Subject: RE: CDP Question

This is much more like the situation where a partner is separately liable for the partnership debt under
state law. Since we are seeking to collect against the officer's personal assets (and not just certain
transferred assets), we should treat the officer as a taxpayer entitled to a CDP notice for purposes of
section 6330.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what the IRS ruled for one taxpayer in 2010, and it can't be cited as precedent. Ezel checks the current Internal Revenue Code and IRS guidance and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.