Ezel / IRS Rulings / 201108032

Partnership settlements remain binding after an FPAA error

Number
201108032
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Ancillary Consistent Agreements
Topics
Procedure, penalties, and administration
Code sections
§ 6223, § 6224
Ruling dated
January 26, 2011
Publicly released
February 25, 2011
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 2011, 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 2011
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

Chief Counsel advised that an FPAA should not be issued for a second party or year when the facts supported issuing it for only one. The IRS could not issue another FPAA for either year under IRC § 6223(f). Settlements already reached for both years remained final and binding, and remaining partners would likely be entitled to the same settlement if they wanted it under IRC § 6224(c)(2).

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: What happens to partnership settlements when an FPAA was issued for more parties or years than the facts supported?
  • Outcome: Advice given.
  • Key authorities: IRC §§ 6223(f), 6224(c)(1), and 6224(c)(2).

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2011012609291337 Number: 201108032
Release Date: 2/25/2011
Office: ----------
UILC: 6224.01-04

From: -------------------
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 9:29:17 AM
To: -------------------------
Cc: -----------
Subject: RE: inconsistency issue in ------- case

I am not sure I understand your facts. It sounds like we issued an FPAA for both---------and ------- when we only should have issued it for only -------. Is that correct? We cannot now issue another FPAA for either year. I.R.C. 6223(f). For the partners who have already settled both years the settlement is final and binding and should be processed. I.R.C. 6224(c)(1). The remaining partners would likely be entitled to the same settlement if they want it. See I.R.C. 6224(c)(2).

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