Chief Counsel Advice 201515032 Released April 10, 2015 Advice

Partnership-level loss character controls later passive-loss proceedings

Apply this to your situation

This page covers one taxpayer's ruling from 2015, which can't be cited as precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current Code and IRS guidance, 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 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

Chief Counsel advised that the amount and character of partnership losses determined on the return or through an FPAA are binding in later partner-level proceedings under section 469. A no-change FPAA can establish those partnership items, as can expiration of the period for issuing an FPAA when the IRS accepts the partnership reporting. The advice nevertheless recommends issuing an FPAA so partners can contest the partnership-level characterization. A final FPAA determination also gives the IRS the section 6229(d) one-year extension to issue affected-item notices limiting individual partners' losses.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: How should partnership-level loss character be established before later section 469 affected-item proceedings?
  • Outcome: Advice given: issue an FPAA even if no change is proposed.
  • Key authorities: IRC §§ 469 and 6229(d); Roberts v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 853; Estate of Quick v. Commissioner, 110 T.C. 172 (1998).

Full text (IRS public release)

ID: CCA_2015040216273601 [Third Party Communication:

UILC: 469.00-00, 6231.03-00 Date of Communication: Month DD, YYYY]

Number: 201515032
Release Date: 4/10/2015
From:
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 4:27:37 PM
To:
Cc:
Bcc:
Subject: RE: TEFRA question

The amount of the losses and their character as trade or business, rental or
portfolio income on a partnership return, or as redetermined through an
FPAA, is binding under section 469 for purposes of any later partner stat
notice proceeding limiting deductions of the partners based on their
material participation. A no change FPAA can serve this purpose as well
as allowing the statute to expire for issuing an FPAA if we agree with the
partnership level reporting. See Roberts v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 853,
860-62 and Estate of Quick v. Commissioner, 110 T.C. 172, 188 (1998). It
is better to issue an FPAA since this gives the partners the opportunity
to contest any partnership-level characterization and gives the Service one
year after this determination becomes final is issue any partner-level stat
notices limiting a partner’s losses under section 469. Otherwise we would
have to issue the affected item stat notices just before the statute expires
without benefit of the one year extension under section 6229(d).

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what the IRS ruled for one taxpayer in 2015, 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.