IRS may process late telephone-excise claim despite EIN error

Number
201502014
Outcome
Advice
Document type
Chief Counsel Advice
IRS subject
Credits or Refunds; Timeliness of Claim
Code sections
§ 6402, § 6511
Ruling dated
December 22, 2014
Publicly released
January 9, 2015

Apply this to your situation

This page covers legal advice the IRS Office of Chief Counsel wrote for IRS staff, issued in 2015, 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 2015
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 a telephone excise tax request and an amended request could be processed as timely under the IRS's administrative practice through July 27, 2012. The advice assumed that the claim would otherwise be allowable on its merits. Although the original request was legally late and therefore could not technically be supplemented, the IRS could process it as an administrative matter. Counsel also advised treating an incorrect employer identification number as harmless given the explanation for the error.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Could the IRS process a late telephone excise tax claim and amended request despite an incorrect EIN?
  • Outcome: Advice given to process both as timely if the claim was otherwise allowable
  • Key authorities: IRC §§ 6402 and 6511

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2014122208220557 [Third Party Communication:

UILC: 6402.00-00, 6511.09-00 Date of Communication: Month DD, YYYY]

Number: 201502014
Release Date: 1/9/2015
From:
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2014 8:22:05 AM
To:
Cc:
Bcc:
Subject: RE: Telephone Excise Tax Procedure Issue

,

I agree. However, a critical step in my analysis is that the claim otherwise would be allowed. If this is the case, then I would not make an issue of the incorrect EIN, especially given the explanation for the error. Consistent with the Service’s practice of administering the program through July 27, 2012, I would advise that the below-referenced request and amended request be worked as if both were timely. The reason that I care about the merits of the claim, which normally is irrelevant to the timeliness question, is that, as you know, even the first request was by definition late (as a matter of law) and a claim denial could be defended on timeliness grounds. Because the original request is not (at least technically) a “timely” claim in fact, there is nothing that may be “supplemented.” But again, the Service is free as an administrative matter to process the claim and to hold the EIN matter harmless.

Feel free to give me a call if you have any questions or want to discuss further.

Regards,

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

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